x0x Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 Although Montana retired with the Chiefs in 94, this could have been seen as largely a roster aspect. The receiving corps simply weren't there (I urge you to look them up for 95) and Steve Bono came in from the 49ers again with the intention of eventually replacing Joe. As well as the 95 Chiefs season went I don't think Montana saw them as a true contender and then there's the 94 49ers winning without him for all we know was too much as well. So imagine if you will Montana healthy leading the 49ers in 91-95. I'm not discussing the 1990 playoffs, just those 5 seasons where Young was the guy (with Bono playing several games in 91). There's the thought process of the 49ers stripping some of the old glue after it was clear Montana wouldn't be returning at least in 91 and certainly after. Lott went away as a free agent that year while Haley was traded in 92 and Bill Romanowski left after 93. Meanwhile you had plenty of younger guys that kept playing or had come in like Harris Barton, Eric Davis, Don Griffin, Steve Wallace, Merton Hanks and Ricky Watters. I for one don't see them missing the playoffs in 91 for starters and I think they beat the Boys in 92. If Dallas loses in 92 they might pick up Sanders ahead of the 49ers but I don't know. Lot of guess work but I have the 49ers winning in 92 and still 94. Jones might stick with Jimmy after 93 but maybe he gets fired after losing in 94. I just feel they win 2 between 91-95 with Joe Cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 Well, Joe wouldn't have been able to play in 1991 because of his injury, and wasn't ready until the end of 1992. The whole scenario really depends on Montana not taking that hit. Even if things work out perfectly during the 1990 playoffs with the 3-peat happening, I think injuries eventually take their toll on Joe just like they did in KC when he missed time. 1991 was the Redskins year plain, and simple for me. 1992, and 1993 maybe a Montana led squad takes out Dallas at least once. Hard to say. Young wasn't the problem against those teams though. The Charles Haley trade is what screwed the 49ers over more. With how difficult it is to just win one Super Bowl, I'm happy the way things turned out. Steve Young probably isn't around if Montana doesn't take that hit by Leonard Marshall, and beating the 1990 Bills wouldn't have been a guarantee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDez Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 It’s crazy that Steve Young who had a top-5 peak ever could’ve never been had things gone differently. Maybe he would’ve got a shot somewhere else but he wouldn’t been the Steve Young we know now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 17 minutes ago, DirtyDez said: It’s crazy that Steve Young who had a top-5 peak ever could’ve never been had things gone differently. Maybe he would’ve got a shot somewhere else but he wouldn’t been the Steve Young we know now. He almost went to the Raiders after the 1989 season I think it was. That would have been weird. Steve signed an extension with the 49ers though, because he felt like he needed to be there. For a guy that was approaching 30, and had shown potential to be a quality quarterback, that would never happen today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFLExpert49 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 They would've been worse, because Young was better than Montana. Montana didn't play NT and he didn't play CB. He also has no ability to stop Ricky Watters and Don Griffin from fumbling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 I don't really see what would have changed those games against Dallas. Young was not the liability in those games and kept a few of those drives alive with his running ability. Even if Montana was able to play that game who's to say that he would have been able to make it that game? He was 36 and reoccuring injuries kept hampering him. Young was their best chance against the Cowboys and I still say that had Jerry not fired Jimmy after 93 it would have been a 3 peat against the Chargers in 94. I don't think Montana would have given them the edge, I would say he would have been a liability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom cody Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 Montana was better than Young. Got to think they win 1 more Super Bowl than the 1994 1 had Montana been there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TVScout Posted February 1, 2019 Share Posted February 1, 2019 On 1/30/2019 at 10:21 PM, Calvert28 said: had Jerry not fired Jimmy after 93 it would have been a 3 peat against the Chargers in 94 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x0x Posted February 4, 2019 Author Share Posted February 4, 2019 On 1/30/2019 at 11:21 PM, Calvert28 said: I don't really see what would have changed those games against Dallas. Young was not the liability in those games and kept a few of those drives alive with his running ability. Even if Montana was able to play that game who's to say that he would have been able to make it that game? He was 36 and reoccuring injuries kept hampering him. Young was their best chance against the Cowboys and I still say that had Jerry not fired Jimmy after 93 it would have been a 3 peat against the Chargers in 94. I don't think Montana would have given them the edge, I would say he would have been a liability. In the 1992 NFC Championship Game, where Montana was very much available, Young went 25/35 for 313 Yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs. Considering it was 10-10 at the half, Montana would not have made the mistakes Young did in the 2nd half. The Rice pass for example was too little too late in my mind. Montana would have been sharper. Young only ran 8 times for 33 that game if mobility is questioned. 93 of course is a disaster yet it doesn't help Young missed on passes early and was picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted February 4, 2019 Share Posted February 4, 2019 1 hour ago, x0x said: In the 1992 NFC Championship Game, where Montana was very much available, Young went 25/35 for 313 Yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs. Considering it was 10-10 at the half, Montana would not have made the mistakes Young did in the 2nd half. The Rice pass for example was too little too late in my mind. Montana would have been sharper. Young only ran 8 times for 33 that game if mobility is questioned. 93 of course is a disaster yet it doesn't help Young missed on passes early and was picked. Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Fact is he was not the same Montana from 89 and reoccurring injuries saw to that. There is no reason to think he could have played at 100% that season or the seasons after. He was 36 back at a time when sports medicine was still developing. He was a victim of his time so the debate could just as well be could he have made it to the 92 championship game and there is no way of telling how he would have been able to handle that front 4 of the Cowboys which was very good at getting to the QB. They may not have been the 91 Eagles, but they were fast and mean. So even if Montana got the ball out in time an injury could have come after the play as well. I just dont see how I can ignore the injuries that plagued him in his latter years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x0x Posted February 5, 2019 Author Share Posted February 5, 2019 5 hours ago, Calvert28 said: Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Fact is he was not the same Montana from 89 and reoccurring injuries saw to that. There is no reason to think he could have played at 100% that season or the seasons after. He was 36 back at a time when sports medicine was still developing. He was a victim of his time so the debate could just as well be could he have made it to the 92 championship game and there is no way of telling how he would have been able to handle that front 4 of the Cowboys which was very good at getting to the QB. They may not have been the 91 Eagles, but they were fast and mean. So even if Montana got the ball out in time an injury could have come after the play as well. I just dont see how I can ignore the injuries that plagued him in his latter years. Well, he did take a far inferior Chiefs offense (look up those receivers) to the Conference Title game that same year....... Also, Bono 91-93 and Grbac in 94 had similar completion percentage to Young those seasons. It's not ground-breaking to assume as stacked as the 49ers were that Montana doesn't hinder that team. I certainly don't think Young in 94 is THE reason the team is so good by which I mean if you put Jeff Hostetler in his place that team still wins 11-12 games at least (they won 13 in reality). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 On 2/5/2019 at 4:08 AM, x0x said: In the 1992 NFC Championship Game, where Montana was very much available, Young went 25/35 for 313 Yards, 1 TD and 2 INTs. Considering it was 10-10 at the half, Montana would not have made the mistakes Young did in the 2nd half. The Rice pass for example was too little too late in my mind. Montana would have been sharper. Young only ran 8 times for 33 that game if mobility is questioned. 93 of course is a disaster yet it doesn't help Young missed on passes early and was picked. I mean...Montana got benched in a playoff game in his prime due to stinking up the joint. Steve Young came in, and played better. Montana was great, but he wasn't immortal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 On 2/4/2019 at 7:46 PM, x0x said: Well, he did take a far inferior Chiefs offense (look up those receivers) to the Conference Title game that same year....... Also, Bono 91-93 and Grbac in 94 had similar completion percentage to Young those seasons. It's not ground-breaking to assume as stacked as the 49ers were that Montana doesn't hinder that team. I certainly don't think Young in 94 is THE reason the team is so good by which I mean if you put Jeff Hostetler in his place that team still wins 11-12 games at least (they won 13 in reality). Wait are you saying Young was a the product of the system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.