Pitt and Balt SB contenders but not us?

[tzill]

Heh, I think you're being rather generous in calling that a "big logical leap." I would call it verbal pot hole full of shit. Have you seen the gameday threads? He has the worse case of bi-polar than a crack whore on withdrawal.

Prior to the game, the Ravens were scoring 31 points per game against their opponents at home. The 9ers go in there on 3 day's rest and only give up 16... If they got dominated, how does that happen? The idiot can't explain it because he can't process the fact that the 9ers are A) not a blitzing team and B) were dropping back to compensate for a weaker secondary (like you mentioned) and thus force Flacco to throw where mistakes can happen. When coverage becomes tight in the red zone, it's hard to score on a defense like that...ergo the 16... The +differential stat would explain that's exactly the consequence of what the 9er defense does, but again, we have to consider who we're dealing with here...

This. Funny how fecal matter follows that one around...

 

[Epic Voidfield]

Interesting analogy (see what I did there?). Funny how Nolan always ends up being associated with diaper loads. He is the inveterate pantshitter. Even at 9-2 his concern trollism isn't satisfied. Hell, the Giants won a WS (after he declared the season "over" a couple of months prior) and he was STILL in full diaper mode the next season.

I told the board about this champion of negativity.

Do you get it now, iMac?

Haha, Tzill... I don't think iMac or the others care, and I'm now beginning to understand why... Ever had that one dumb co-worker that no matter how bad shit was, you'd just point and laugh at him for comic relief? Except that this isn't exactly comic relief, this is more than that. We have something very special here with NolanNonsense. Anonymity + Internet + Darwin's theory = entertainment. I feel great already!

 

[Epic Voidfield]

On an interesting off-topic sidenote message from SportsHoopla:

Hello Epic Voidfield. It appears that you have not posted on our forums in several weeks. Is your team really that bad? Throw your two-cents in the discussion.

ROFL. Why, yes - I'll most certainly will!

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

Heh, I think you're being rather generous in calling that a "big logical leap." I would call it verbal pot hole full of shit. Have you seen the gameday threads? He has the worse case of bi-polar than a crack whore on withdrawal.

Prior to the game, the Ravens were scoring 31 points per game against their opponents at home. The 9ers go in there on 3 day's rest and only give up 16... If they got dominated, how does that happen? The idiot can't explain it because he can't process the fact that the 9ers are A) not a blitzing team and B) were dropping back to compensate for a weaker secondary (like you mentioned) and thus force Flacco to throw where mistakes can happen. When coverage becomes tight in the red zone, it's hard to score on a defense like that...ergo the 16... The +differential stat would explain that's exactly the consequence of what the 9er defense does, but again, we have to consider who we're dealing with here...

Still got more than doubled in scoring and the game was never in doubt. As for the offensive side of the ball it astounds me that you would think nine sacks, completely shutting down the running game and holding the entire unit 170 yards of offense is not domination.

 

[Epic Voidfield]

Still got more than doubled in scoring and the game was never in doubt. As for the offensive side of the ball it astounds me that you would think nine sacks, completely shutting down the running game and holding the entire unit 170 yards of offense is not domination.

This shit is too easy. Why did you respond!

If the outcome was 3-9 Ravens, is that still more than doubling? What if the outcome was 20-42, is that more than doubling? So, what you're telling me is that you can't differentiate between a good defensive game and a bad one... Heh, what else is new? This is like feeding monkeys. How much you want to bet you reply and come back for more?

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

This shit is too easy. Why did you respond!

If the outcome was 3-9 Ravens, is that still more than doubling? What if the outcome was 20-42, is that more than doubling? So, what you're telling me is that you can't differentiate between a good defensive game and a bad one... Heh, what else is new? This is like feeding monkeys. How much you want to bet you reply and come back for more?

What? I can't even begin to figure out how your mind formulated that little twisted bit of logic. At least I guess you'd call it logic for lack of a better term though it hardly qualifies as such. Were you supposed to be making a point somewhere in there?

 

[vvoland]

What? I can't even begin to figure out how your mind formulated that little twisted bit of logic. At least I guess you'd call it logic for lack of a better term though it hardly qualifies as such. Were you supposed to be making a point somewhere in there?

the logic you're referring to is called arithmetic. i'm sure the game was never in doubt; if you chime in on every GDT that the niners will lose because of a. b. c. etc, you'll be right.. once in a while. more often last year than this one, but hey, the rest of us get to enjoy a very good team. but i can't imagine how you can say things like 'the game was never in doubt' when it was a. 6-6 in the 4th and b. only became a 2 possession game w/ just over 3 mins left. of course, the pitt game is already decided but i'll wait for that monday night before i start proclaiming the niners' demise. in fact, i won't even do so then IF they lose.

i was generous calling your reasoning a leap of logic and you an alarmist. i get the sense you were rooting for the ravens just so you can look 'insightful' on a message board. i'm almost positive you'll be looking for a steelers win. that said, let me [against my better judgement] say one last thing about this LOS debate. you saw direct visual evidence of domination at the point of attack in that game. the ravens' front 4 showed it in spades. but there's more to the game than sacks. unless you were game-planning with vangio, you can't possibly know what the strategy was. did we want to get pressure of flacco? i'm sure we wouldn't have refused it.. but what we didn't do, was lose containment on the edges, give up big chunks on the ground, and sacrifice the middle of the field in order to get that pressure. we dropped 7 into coverage the entire game, played a perfect bend-but-dont-break defense, held the ravens to 16 pts and DOMINATED the line of scrimmage when we needed to [in the redzone, on 1st and goal from the 4].

but i'm sure none of this will drive you off your point that the niners o-line is awful, our d-line is terrible, alex smith is worse than every qb in the league, and that the steelers will come in and blow us out. if that's your definition of being a fan, i pity you. either the niners lose and you can't be happy [if you are, in fact, a niners fan] or the niners win and your 'prediction' is wrong [and you still can't be happy]. unless you're a masochist, that can't be much fun.

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

the logic you're referring to is called arithmetic. i'm sure the game was never in doubt; if you chime in on every GDT that the niners will lose because of a. b. c. etc, you'll be right.. once in a while. more often last year than this one, but hey, the rest of us get to enjoy a very good team. but i can't imagine how you can say things like 'the game was never in doubt' when it was a. 6-6 in the 4th and b. only became a 2 possession game w/ just over 3 mins left. of course, the pitt game is already decided but i'll wait for that monday night before i start proclaiming the niners' demise. in fact, i won't even do so then IF they lose.

i was generous calling your reasoning a leap of logic and you an alarmist. i get the sense you were rooting for the ravens just so you can look 'insightful' on a message board. i'm almost positive you'll be looking for a steelers win. that said, let me [against my better judgement] say one last thing about this LOS debate. you saw direct visual evidence of domination at the point of attack in that game. the ravens' front 4 showed it in spades. but there's more to the game than sacks. unless you were game-planning with vangio, you can't possibly know what the strategy was. did we want to get pressure of flacco? i'm sure we wouldn't have refused it.. but what we didn't do, was lose containment on the edges, give up big chunks on the ground, and sacrifice the middle of the field in order to get that pressure. we dropped 7 into coverage the entire game, played a perfect bend-but-dont-break defense, held the ravens to 16 pts and DOMINATED the line of scrimmage when we needed to [in the redzone, on 1st and goal from the 4].

but i'm sure none of this will drive you off your point that the niners o-line is awful, our d-line is terrible, alex smith is worse than every qb in the league, and that the steelers will come in and blow us out. if that's your definition of being a fan, i pity you. either the niners lose and you can't be happy [if you are, in fact, a niners fan] or the niners win and your 'prediction' is wrong [and you still can't be happy]. unless you're a masochist, that can't be much fun.

What a waste of space. Clearly you haven't been paying attention. As far as games, I've called the outcome of every game correctly except the Eagles game. I believe I have been one of Alex Smith's biggest supporters this year; only a newb wouldn't know that.
I don't believe anyone here has followed the 49ers longer than I have. But for the record, yes, I think Pittsburg is exactly the type of team the 49ers struggle against and I believe the Steelers will win that game handily.

 

[vvoland]

my post count notwithstanding, i've been here since the pre-season and on the ESPN board since 2000 [i'm curious why you didn't keep the same screename as your ESPN one]. i read more than i write but asinine statements like 'the ravens o-line dominated the los' will bring me into an argument i should know better than to enter. that said, you have beeen [far and away, i might add] the most negative poster on this forum. congratulations on 'calling the outcome of every game correctly' and all; vegas is calling. i would encourage you, however, to refrain from making such remarkably obtuse statements, drowning them in certitude, and ridiculing other posters [and i don't mean myself] for not sharing that point of view. if you can't see how saying 'the game was never in doubt' is beyond obtuse, when it was tied going into the 4th and a 1 possession game for 57 minutes, we should probably leave it at that. the ravens' offensive domination at the LOS, however, will take more than 'flacco didn't get sacked' for me to let that go. but i already addressed that in the post above.

 

[mem49er]

John or Jim? Both seem pretty good to me.

I was referring to Jim, but take your pick. Either one will provide as much validity as what I highlighted in your post.

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

my post count notwithstanding, i've been here since the pre-season and on the ESPN board since 2000 [i'm curious why you didn't keep the same screename as your ESPN one]. i read more than i write but asinine statements like 'the ravens o-line dominated the los' will bring me into an argument i should know better than to enter. that said, you have beeen [far and away, i might add] the most negative poster on this forum. congratulations on 'calling the outcome of every game correctly' and all; vegas is calling. i would encourage you, however, to refrain from making such remarkably obtuse statements, drowning them in certitude, and ridiculing other posters [and i don't mean myself] for not sharing that point of view. if you can't see how saying 'the game was never in doubt' is beyond obtuse, when it was tied going into the 4th and a 1 possession game for 57 minutes, we should probably leave it at that. the ravens' offensive domination at the LOS, however, will take more than 'flacco didn't get sacked' for me to let that go. but i already addressed that in the post above.

Another indicator of your ignorance of the goings on on this board. Everyone knows my NolanNonsense name was banned by the SF Giants board administrator because folks like Tweezil kept whining about my posts; it's old news. I had to select another one. I have never ridiculed another poster. You might want to go back and re-read the thread because its been the other way around. I'm not shy about backing my position but the insults have come from Tweezil and EpicVoid( who coincidentally shows up a lot when tweezil needs support for his arguments).

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

I was referring to Jim, but take your pick. Either one will provide as much validity as what I highlighted in your post.

My statement was clear. What you inferred from it I cannot be responsible for. I think both John and Jim are good coaches.

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

my post count notwithstanding, i've been here since the pre-season and on the ESPN board since 2000 [i'm curious why you didn't keep the same screename as your ESPN one]. i read more than i write but asinine statements like 'the ravens o-line dominated the los' will bring me into an argument i should know better than to enter. that said, you have beeen [far and away, i might add] the most negative poster on this forum. congratulations on 'calling the outcome of every game correctly' and all; vegas is calling. i would encourage you, however, to refrain from making such remarkably obtuse statements, drowning them in certitude, and ridiculing other posters [and i don't mean myself] for not sharing that point of view. if you can't see how saying 'the game was never in doubt' is beyond obtuse, when it was tied going into the 4th and a 1 possession game for 57 minutes, we should probably leave it at that. the ravens' offensive domination at the LOS, however, will take more than 'flacco didn't get sacked' for me to let that go. but i already addressed that in the post above.

The 49ers - Browns game was one-possession game until the very end as well but I never thought the outcome was in doubt.

 

[mem49er]

My statement was clear. What you inferred from it I cannot be responsible for. I think both John and Jim are good coaches.

Quite a paradox there. If your statement was clear, then I should make the correct interpretation. You stated that we were dominated on both sides of the trenches. I think that statement has the same validity as me saying Jim Harbaugh is a terrible coach. I thought I had been clear enough earlier, but I guess not.

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

Quite a paradox there. If your statement was clear, then I should make the correct interpretation. You stated that we were dominated on both sides of the trenches. I think that statement has the same validity as me saying Jim Harbaugh is a terrible coach. I thought I had been clear enough earlier, but I guess not.

One would think so. That narrows it down to lack of interpretation or comprehension skills. And you are correct, you were not clear; your statement made no sense.

 

[mem49er]

One would think so. That narrows it down to my lack of interpretation or comprehension skills. And you are always correct, you were clear; your statement made complete sense to anyone with even marginal intelligence.

Fify.

 

[Mozart'sGhost]

Fify.

Ha ha! Nice.

 

[vvoland]

Another indicator of your ignorance of the goings on on this board. Everyone knows my NolanNonsense name was banned by the SF Giants board administrator because folks like Tweezil kept whining about my posts; it's old news. I had to select another one. I have never ridiculed another poster. You might want to go back and re-read the thread because its been the other way around. I'm not shy about backing my position but the insults have come from Tweezil and EpicVoid( who coincidentally shows up a lot when tweezil needs support for his arguments).

cognitively dissonant much?

 

[tzill]

the logic you're referring to is called arithmetic. i'm sure the game was never in doubt; if you chime in on every GDT that the niners will lose because of a. b. c. etc, you'll be right.. once in a while. more often last year than this one, but hey, the rest of us get to enjoy a very good team. but i can't imagine how you can say things like 'the game was never in doubt' when it was a. 6-6 in the 4th and b. only became a 2 possession game w/ just over 3 mins left. of course, the pitt game is already decided but i'll wait for that monday night before i start proclaiming the niners' demise. in fact, i won't even do so then IF they lose.

i was generous calling your reasoning a leap of logic and you an alarmist. i get the sense you were rooting for the ravens just so you can look 'insightful' on a message board. i'm almost positive you'll be looking for a steelers win. that said, let me [against my better judgement] say one last thing about this LOS debate. you saw direct visual evidence of domination at the point of attack in that game. the ravens' front 4 showed it in spades. but there's more to the game than sacks. unless you were game-planning with vangio, you can't possibly know what the strategy was. did we want to get pressure of flacco? i'm sure we wouldn't have refused it.. but what we didn't do, was lose containment on the edges, give up big chunks on the ground, and sacrifice the middle of the field in order to get that pressure. we dropped 7 into coverage the entire game, played a perfect bend-but-dont-break defense, held the ravens to 16 pts and DOMINATED the line of scrimmage when we needed to [in the redzone, on 1st and goal from the 4].

but i'm sure none of this will drive you off your point that the niners o-line is awful, our d-line is terrible, alex smith is worse than every qb in the league, and that the steelers will come in and blow us out. if that's your definition of being a fan, i pity you. either the niners lose and you can't be happy [if you are, in fact, a niners fan] or the niners win and your 'prediction' is wrong [and you still can't be happy]. unless you're a masochist, that can't be much fun.

FUD nailed again. Different diaper, same shit.

 

[vvoland]

The 49ers - Browns game was one-possession game until the very end as well but I never thought the outcome was in doubt.

considering the browns have one of the more dangerous return men in football and that one missed defensive assignment, blown coverage, poor tackle can result in 6, 7, even 8 points, i envy your prescience. here [and elsewhere], you and i differ greatly. there's a reason why the game is played for 60 minutes and nothing is decided until the final whistle.