Merry Christmas to All

[tzill]

I disagree. The Falcons Defense is their biggest weakness, and only slightly, if any better than the Packs'.

Yes. The Packers D isn't as good as it was when they won the Super Bowl (go figure), but they played well enough to be 11th in Yards per Game this season (Atlanta - 24th). You can blame that on Matt Ryan's high-octane offense, but Green Bay had some high-scoring, many possession football games, as well. The Falcons snatched more turnovers (31 to 23), but they gave up almost the exact same number of PPG (26.2 to 27.1).

Also, we now know that the front 4 of the Niners is worse when Justin Smith has one arm (which we would have assumed prior to these games), but mostly because, yes, it causes Aldon Smith to disappear for long stretches. These are not insurmountable tasks, and if CK throws as many perfect balls as he did on Saturday, they could even win a shootout with Atlanta. The main focus should be on avoiding the big play from Jones, White or Jacquizz and minding Tony Gonzalez on 3rd and intermediate and near the goal line.

NFL Stats: by Team Category

NFL Stats: by Team Category

Or, Aldon is really hurt. His shoulder has been hurt most of the year. The falcons do two things pretty well on defense: limit scoring and defense the pass.

Their D isn't great, but it's much better than the fackers in those two critical areas.

I agree that the niners could win a shootout Sunday, and even another one in New Orleans. But, that ain't the way to bet.

 

[SFAnthem]

1. I rewatched the game twice.
2. My opinion has not changed: Culliver was awful, Aldon was absent, the DL got gashed by a crap RB, Rodgers was mostly unmolested, the only pressure came from Willis. The D looked better once the fackers had to play from behind, but prior to that didn't really look very good.
3. That "former NFL MVP" played like crap.

Again, anything is possible, but they've been erratic all year and I don't see that suddenly changing now.

The defense didnt play great, but was effective enough. Aldon didn't totally disappear. He was getting close to Rodgers as the game moved on and forced a fumble that bounced back to Rodgers.

The crap rb had one good run for the td, didn't see him do much of anything beyond that.

Rodgers hasn't been at the same level all year as he was last year but I give credit to the defense for some of that.

Erratic, yes. The defense is not as "shut down" as it was last year. Good thing is, they don't have to be for the team to be successful.

They have faced elite QBs like Rodgers (twice), Brees, and Brady and came out with victories.

 

[Heathbar012]

Or, Aldon is really hurt. His shoulder has been hurt most of the year. The falcons do two things pretty well on defense: limit scoring and defense the pass.

Their D isn't great, but it's much better than the fackers in those two critical areas.

I agree that the niners could win a shootout Sunday, and even another one in New Orleans. But, that ain't the way to bet.

I hope you have that set up as a shortcut paste at this point.

The Falcons don't limit scoring much better than the Packers. 16 less points over the course of a season is not much better. As far as defending the pass, the Packers actually gave up 24 yards less per game than the Falcons (without getting to play the AFC West). Green Bay gave up 10 more TDs through the air, but also had 18 more sacks. For a guy that enjoys statistics, I think you're ignoring some important ones.

I think expecting the Falcons to slow the Niners offense is just as foolhardy as assuming San Francisco's schizophrenic and injured D will dominate. Somehow, this "Niners are pretenders" meme has forced you to over-value every good team they haven't played and under-value every good team that they've beaten.

 

[msgkings322]

I hope you have that set up as a shortcut paste at this point.

The Falcons don't limit scoring much better than the Packers. 16 less points over the course of a season is not much better. As far as defending the pass, the Packers actually gave up 24 yards less per game than the Falcons (without getting to play the AFC West). Green Bay gave up 10 more TDs through the air, but also had 18 more sacks. For a guy that enjoys statistics, I think you're ignoring some important ones.

I think expecting the Falcons to slow the Niners offense is just as foolhardy as assuming San Francisco's schizophrenic and injured D will dominate. Somehow, this "Niners are pretenders" meme has forced you to over-value every good team they haven't played and under-value every good team that they've beaten.

THIS

tzill doesn't let go of an argumentative position. Gotta give credit for that I guess. Lawyer's curse?

Problem is only a Niners SB win would convince him he was wrong...and even now that's only maybe a 30ish% chance. Even then I doubt he'd admit defeat....something about longshots coming through sometimes?

:popsnoidea:

 

[Toolrulzz]

WOW. I really don't have anything left to say. It's like we watched two different games. We just watched a transcendent performance from Kap and you're complaining that the Niners got "gashed" for a whopping 352 yards. The D did their job and they did it well. I'll give it up to you though, your ability to stick to your guns despite plenty of evidence to the contrary is impressive.

Edit: Ok, maybe I have one more thing left to add. The Niners spent almost the entire night in nickel and dime. I think I read somewhere that Sop played 3 snaps all night. They weren't scared of the GB running game. At all. They didn't care if they gave up a few yards on the ground as long as they were able to slow down Rodgers. And as much as you want to believe they failed in that area, they succeeded.

 

[tzill]

The defense didnt play great, but was effective enough. Aldon didn't totally disappear. He was getting close to Rodgers as the game moved on and forced a fumble that bounced back to Rodgers.

The crap rb had one good run for the td, didn't see him do much of anything beyond that.

Rodgers hasn't been at the same level all year as he was last year but I give credit to the defense for some of that.

Erratic, yes. The defense is not as "shut down" as it was last year. Good thing is, they don't have to be for the team to be successful.

They have faced elite QBs like Rodgers (twice), Brees, and Brady and came out with victories.

They haven't put three good games together so far this year, I don't see them suddenly finding that rhythm. Let's hope I'm wrong.

 

[tzill]

I hope you have that set up as a shortcut paste at this point.

The Falcons don't limit scoring much better than the Packers. 16 less points over the course of a season is not much better. As far as defending the pass, the Packers actually gave up 24 yards less per game than the Falcons (without getting to play the AFC West). Green Bay gave up 10 more TDs through the air, but also had 18 more sacks. For a guy that enjoys statistics, I think you're ignoring some important ones.

I think expecting the Falcons to slow the Niners offense is just as foolhardy as assuming San Francisco's schizophrenic and injured D will dominate. Somehow, this "Niners are pretenders" meme has forced you to over-value every good team they haven't played and under-value every good team that they've beaten.

I was looking at points given up and passes defensed. I'm not expecting the falcon D to shut us down, but I don't think we'll boat race them as we did the fackers.

I stand by the statements that 1. no team has ever blown a 28 point lead and gone to the SB and 2. erratic defenses don't win championships.

We'll see. I'll happily eat crow if I'm wrong (while I cash my Niners futures bet at 5-1).

 

[tzill]

THIS

tzill doesn't let go of an argumentative position. Gotta give credit for that I guess. Lawyer's curse?

Problem is only a Niners SB win would convince him he was wrong...and even now that's only maybe a 30ish% chance. Even then I doubt he'd admit defeat....something about longshots coming through sometimes?

:popsnoidea:

Nope. If they win the SB, I am OBVIOUSLY wrong. Like I was wrong about Smith v. Kap. 30% seems about right.

 

[tzill]

WOW. I really don't have anything left to say. It's like we watched two different games. We just watched a transcendent performance from Kap and you're complaining that the Niners got "gashed" for a whopping 352 yards. The D did their job and they did it well. I'll give it up to you though, your ability to stick to your guns despite plenty of evidence to the contrary is impressive.

Edit: Ok, maybe I have one more thing left to add. The Niners spent almost the entire night in nickel and dime. I think I read somewhere that Sop played 3 snaps all night. They weren't scared of the GB running game. At all. They didn't care if they gave up a few yards on the ground as long as they were able to slow down Rodgers. And as much as you want to believe they failed in that area, they succeeded.

Yep. Two different games apparently. And there isn't "plenty of evidence" that the defense played well. Stop making shit up. Nobody's arguing Kap or the offense -- it's the defense that was erratic.

 

[Toolrulzz]

There is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to see it and we disagree on what acceptable output is for a defense going against a top QB like Rodgers.

The Niners ranked second in scoring defense giving up 17 ppg. They ranked third in total defense giving up 294 ypg. The Packers eclipsed both of those totals by 7 points and 58 yards. Literally all of that coming on their final meaningless drive. I never expected them to completely shut down Rodgers. But I did expect them to be able to slow him down, just like they did in week 1. In my opinion they did just that.

Rodgers averaged about 268 ypg, slightly more than 2 TD passes a game, .5 INT a game and completed about 67% of his passes per game in the regular season. On Saturday he threw for 257, 2 TD, 1 pick and completed just under 67% of his passes for the game. Clearly an average game this year for Rodgers.

Look, I'm not saying the Niners dominated defensively. They did what they needed to do and held Rodgers to an average-for-him game. If you can make Rodgers perform average then you have a great chance at beating them because their D truly is awful. Again, I believe the Niner D did what they needed to do

 

[tzill]

There is plenty of evidence, you just refuse to see it and we disagree on what acceptable output is for a defense going against a top QB like Rodgers.

The Niners ranked second in scoring defense giving up 17 ppg. They ranked third in total defense giving up 294 ypg. The Packers eclipsed both of those totals by 7 points and 58 yards. Literally all of that coming on their final meaningless drive. I never expected them to completely shut down Rodgers. But I did expect them to be able to slow him down, just like they did in week 1. In my opinion they did just that.

Rodgers averaged about 268 ypg, slightly more than 2 TD passes a game, .5 INT a game and completed about 67% of his passes per game in the regular season. On Saturday he threw for 257, 2 TD, 1 pick and completed just under 67% of his passes for the game. Clearly an average game this year for Rodgers.

Look, I'm not saying the Niners dominated defensively. They did what they needed to do and held Rodgers to an average-for-him game. If you can make Rodgers perform average then you have a great chance at beating them because their D truly is awful. Again, I believe the Niner D did what they needed to do

Stand on the sideline and not shit the bed while the offense won the game? Even then, they couldn't stop stepping on their own dick for 2.5 quarters.

 

[Toolrulzz]

Well, there's some evidence and you've clearly chosen to ignore it.

Anyway, where were your seats for the game?

 

[Heathbar012]

I was looking at points given up and passes defensed. I'm not expecting the falcon D to shut us down, but I don't think we'll boat race them as we did the fackers.

I stand by the statements that 1. no team has ever blown a 28 point lead and gone to the SB and 2. erratic defenses don't win championships.

We'll see. I'll happily eat crow if I'm wrong (while I cash my Niners futures bet at 5-1).

It isn't the way to bet. It's just the way that you did bet at the beginning of the year.

I think you just need to expand your definition of "Super Bowl Contender" and narrow your definitions of "much better" and "pretender." I agree with your premise, and it is obvious that there are holes on this team, but it is equally as obvious that every remaining team is vulnerable to similar flops. Furthermore, if both sides of the ball play to their best, they won't even give special teams a chance to ruin it (even if the Falcons/Pats/Ravens play to their best, too). Of course, for the reasons you have stated and the general laws of humanity, that is a big if (for all four teams).

 

[tzill]

Well, there's some evidence and you've clearly chosen to ignore it.

Anyway, where were your seats for the game?

Here's where I get frustrated:

Your statement: there is a lot of evidence the D played well and you're ignoring it
My contention: no, there isn't a LOT of evidence
Your retorr: well, there's some...so you're ignoring it.

basic logic. Some does not equal lots. That I disagree with you doesn't mean I ignored any evidence. I simply factored in that evidence (paucity of it that there was) and concluded that the D didn't play very well.

Section 31, 45 yard line. about 7 rows behind the visitor's bench

 

[tzill]

It isn't the way to bet. It's just the way that you did bet at the beginning of the year.

I think you just need to expand your definition of "Super Bowl Contender" and narrow your definitions of "much better" and "pretender." I agree with your premise, and it is obvious that there are holes on this team, but it is equally as obvious that every remaining team is vulnerable to similar flops. Furthermore, if both sides of the ball play to their best, they won't even give special teams a chance to ruin it (even if the Falcons/Pats/Ravens play to their best, too). Of course, for the reasons you have stated and the general laws of humanity, that is a big if (for all four teams).

Oh believe me, if we beat the Coons, I'll lay off half that bet before the SB.

Taking a big picture look at it, how likely is it that the niners put together three excellent games in a row? That's what I'm saying. The D is just too erratic.

Caveat: Much like the Greatest Show on Turf, the Pistol Offense may just be too new and unstoppable for the niners D to matter. We may be able to boat race the field.

 

[Toolrulzz]

Here's where I get frustrated:

Your statement: there is a lot of evidence the D played well and you're ignoring it
My contention: no, there isn't a LOT of evidence
Your retorr: well, there's some...so you're ignoring it.

basic logic. Some does not equal lots. That I disagree with you doesn't mean I ignored any evidence. I simply factored in that evidence (paucity of it that there was) and concluded that the D didn't play very well.

Section 31, 45 yard line. about 7 rows behind the visitor's bench

We could go on and on with this argument but neither of us are going to change our minds. So, agree to disagree and also Go Niners!

Nice, those are some sweet seats. I got spoiled as a kid with some pretty good seats. My Grandpa and his brother and a mutual friend shared season tickets 5 rows behind the visitor's bench on the 25 yard line closest to the scoreboard (can't remember the exact section anymore, haven't had those tickets in years). I saw three gut punching playoff losses from those seats. Finally broke that streak Saturday and I may have enjoyed it a little too much. I sat in section 52 row 7 and I'm pretty sure most of the people near me hated me by the end of the game.

 

[Heathbar012]

Oh believe me, if we beat the Coons, I'll lay off half that bet before the SB.

Taking a big picture look at it, how likely is it that the niners put together three excellent games in a row? That's what I'm saying. The D is just too erratic.

I agree with those statements/rhetorical question. I disagreed with your assertion that the Falcons D is much better than the Packers D. After watching them play four to five games each and reviewing the stats, I think they are both league average, with a slight advantage to the Packers because Dom Capers' blitz packages often impress me and Green Bay has more playoff experience (moderately helpful).

Does this mean I think the Niners are certain to beat the Falcons or even put up more than 45 points against them? No, but it wouldn't surprise me, either. I definitely agree that SF's D has been inconsistent. However, I don't think this makes them any less of a Super Bowl Contender than any remaining team (or has all season), but that is just semantics (ie. who is a contender? Top 8? Top 4? The team playing the best at the end of the year?). Unfortunately, I think those semantics influenced your opinion of the Green Bay and Atlanta Defenses, so I called your attention to some conflicting stats. Either way, it should be a great game next Sunday, and a little Dirty Bird Revenge would be sweet.

 

[calsnowskier]

Here's where I get frustrated:

Your statement: there is a lot of evidence the D played well and you're ignoring it
My contention: no, there isn't a LOT of evidence
Your retorr: well, there's some...so you're ignoring it.

basic logic. Some does not equal lots. That I disagree with you doesn't mean I ignored any evidence. I simply factored in that evidence (paucity of it that there was) and concluded that the D didn't play very well.

Section 31, 45 yard line. about 7 rows behind the visitor's bench

Isn't this what Hammer did in the other thread and you jumped down his throat for it?

Tz, you gotta leave the lawyer at the login screen sometimes. We are just fans discussing the issues here. You do not need to go for the death penalty every time.

 

[Epic Voidfield]

Isn't this what Hammer did in the other thread and you jumped down his throat for it?

Tz, you gotta leave the lawyer at the login screen sometimes. We are just fans discussing the issues here. You do not need to go for the death penalty every time.

I'm calling it the 2010 World Series syndrome. There hasn't been torture around these parts lately and he was itching to get his fix with the game on the line and Rodgers with the ball to validate the defense. Too bad for him the 49ers said "fuck you" to that and scored 45 on them.

 

[tzill]

We could go on and on with this argument but neither of us are going to change our minds. So, agree to disagree and also Go Niners!

Nice, those are some sweet seats. I got spoiled as a kid with some pretty good seats. My Grandpa and his brother and a mutual friend shared season tickets 5 rows behind the visitor's bench on the 25 yard line closest to the scoreboard (can't remember the exact section anymore, haven't had those tickets in years). I saw three gut punching playoff losses from those seats. Finally broke that streak Saturday and I may have enjoyed it a little too much. I sat in section 52 row 7 and I'm pretty sure most of the people near me hated me by the end of the game.

I don't need you to "change your mind," just to be logically consistent. I can agree to disagree with a logically reasoned stance, but not a "you're ignoring the evidence" taunt.

If people around you don't hate you a little bit, you're not doing your job as a fan I always say...