Week 10 Games

[Golfman]

14 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

And then we wouldn't have drafted Gary and instead we would have drafted Christian Wilkins, Dexter Lawrence or Jeffery Simmons. 

Clay Matthews playing a mixture of relief pass rush and ILB rusher would have been fun to watch. 

****, this is gonna be like another Mandarich instead of Barry Sanders or Deion Sanders if Gary doesn't turn into an 80 career sack player. 

Terrible analogy! Gary's athleticism and strength aren't a product of 'roids. Nobody offered us 3 -1st round picks for our 1st round pick this time either. Chicago Bears did so they could draft Mandarich instead. 

I was not a fan of the Gary draft, but he's ours and I'm wishing him the best. No interest in continually going back to say, "I'm right'! It's way too early to tell what he's going to become as a football player. 

BTW, your idea that Matthews never had an inside pass rush is just false. Clark had a good year as an inside pass rusher last year and Daniel did years prior. 

[MacReady]

9 minutes ago, Leader said:

? Why pull for the team behind us in the playoff rankings to win (?) against the only team ahead of us in the playoff rankings (?) who we just happen to play in two weeks?

You need to bury your hate with rationale thought

 

 

 

It’s not necessarily rational thought.  You either go conservative with your rooting and hope for A bye, or you get greedy and hope for THE bye.  It’s a tough decision on who to root for in this one.  With the Seahawks playing the Eagles, Rams, Vikings and Niners again and the Niners playing us, Ravens, Saints, Rams and Seahawks again, both teams have a tough schedule so I think I lean more towards hoping the Seahawks win.  

[MacReady]

2 minutes ago, Golfman said:

Terrible analogy! Gary's athleticism and strength aren't a product of 'roids. Nobody offered us 3 -1st round picks for our 1st round pick this time either. Chicago Bears did so they could draft Mandarich instead. 

I was not a fan of the Gary draft, but he's ours and I'm wishing him the best. No interest in continually going back to say, "I'm right'! It's way too early to tell what he's going to become as a football player. 

BTW, your idea that Matthews never had an inside pass rush is just false. Clark had a good year as an inside pass rusher last year and Daniel did years prior. 

I’m in the Gary camp.  
 

Second, like I said, when we had Daniels we had zero pass coverage.  There were three plays in 2017 alone where Matthews was at the QB in 2 seconds flat that were pass completions.

[Golfman]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

I’m in the Gary camp.  
 

Second, like I said, when we had Daniels we had zero pass coverage.  There were three plays in 2017 alone where Matthews was at the QB in 2 seconds flat that were pass completions.

I get it and sadly we missed on a few draft picks in the secondary. Also, when you're in the playoffs year after year, you pick a lot lower, increasing your chances of drafting poorly or 'missing' on a pick. I'm a huge Clay Matthews fan and in hindsight, he's be better than Fackrell for sure. He misses too many games but no doubt would be our best option at inside linebacker right now. 93 sucks and Martinez can't cover. 

[Leader]

6 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

It’s not necessarily rational thought.  You either go conservative with your rooting and hope for A bye, or you get greedy and hope for THE bye.  It’s a tough decision on who to root for in this one.  With the Seahawks playing the Eagles, Rams, Vikings and Niners again and the Niners playing us, Ravens, Saints, Rams and Seahawks again, both teams have a tough schedule so I think I lean more towards hoping the Seahawks win.  

I dont see it as so complicated. All things considered, its better or us if San Fran loses.

[Golfman]

13 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

It’s not necessarily rational thought.  You either go conservative with your rooting and hope for A bye, or you get greedy and hope for THE bye.  It’s a tough decision on who to root for in this one.  With the Seahawks playing the Eagles, Rams, Vikings and Niners again and the Niners playing us, Ravens, Saints, Rams and Seahawks again, both teams have a tough schedule so I think I lean more towards hoping the Seahawks win.  

 

5 minutes ago, Leader said:

I dont see it as so complicated. All things considered, its better or us if San Fran loses.

If we take care of business and beat San Fran, we'd be able to lose 1 game and get THE buy at 13-3. One of our losses is to an AFC team. We'd have the tie breaker against NO and SF if we beat them. So if we go 5-1 and lose to Minny, we wrap up division and first round bye. The 49ers will lose at least 2 of remaining games, sans ours. Saints will drop one or more and it might be to San Fran. 

[Scoremore]

4 minutes ago, Leader said:

I dont see it as so complicated. All things considered, its better or us if San Fran loses.

Perhaps.  Just can't get past my hate.  Think I"ll just remain neutral and enjoy the game.  Sea NO and GB all vying for that #2 seed.   Guess it also depends on whether you think the Pack will beat SF after the bye.  If they lose then it is unlikely we overtake them for the #1 seed.  In which case it's better that Sea loses.  

[Leader]

1 minute ago, Golfman said:

If we take care of business and beat San Fran, we'd be able to lose 1 game and get THE buy at 13-3. One of our losses is to an AFC team. We'd have the tie breaker against NO and SF if we beat them. So if we go 5-1 and lose to Minny, we wrap up division and first round bye. The 49ers will lose at least 2 of remaining games, sans ours. Saints will drop one or more and it might be to San Fran. 

I keep it simpler:

Yes - it will always be best that we win our games.
Yes - it will be better if San Fran loses tonight.

I keep it simpler...and probably sleep better at night

[Leader]

Just now, Scoremore said:

Perhaps.  Just can't get past my hate.  Think I"ll just remain neutral and enjoy the game.  Sea NO and GB all vying for that #2 seed.   Guess it also depends on whether you think the Pack will beat SF after the bye.  If they lose then it is unlikely we overtake them for the #1 seed.  In which case it's better that Sea loses.  

THATS MY POINT. There's more than just the #2 seed in play.

The #1 seed is there for our taking (!) and San Fran (who is currently two games ahead us in the loss column) losing tonight will assist in that effort - since - when we beat them head up in Week 12 - we'll be tied records-wise - but have the head to head matchup.

There is method to the madness after all.

Bury the hate. Root for SEA. It will be cathartic and better for your overall health to lose the hate

[MacReady]

Just now, Leader said:

I dont see it as so complicated. All things considered, its better or us if San Fran loses.

But not necessarily. 

You have to consider imperfect world implications.  In a perfect world, yes, you want the Niners to lose.  It's not a perfect world.  If you want the Niners to lose, you are assuming a LOT. 

First, you are assuming that we beat the Niners two weeks from now. 
Second, you are assuming that the Niners lose one more game than we do ON TOP of us beating them. 

They have 0 losses.  We have 2.  There are 6 games left in the season. 

If the Niners beat us, they would have to lose 4/5 games and we would have to win 5/5 remaining games.  That is literally the only way we could come out ahead of them. 

You also have to consider that if the Seahawks win, they're in a good position to win the division. 

For example, let's say the Seahawks win. 
Then, let's say we beat the Niners. 

Suddenly the Seahawks are ahead in that division and it's a case of the Seahawks having to lose one more game than we do for us to win the #1 seed. 

I know you don't see it as complicated.  You have never for as long as you've been here been able to look at this sort of thing into the future assuming anything but the best.  You're incapable of looking at the bigger picture when considering playoff implications. 

Don't take anything for granted.  The first task is making the playoffs.  For all we know we could lose 3 of the next 6 and be 11-5 and the Vikings could win out.  In that scenario, you'd really wish the Seahawks had lost to the Niners. 

 

[MacReady]

Just now, Golfman said:

 

If

 

[Leader]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

But not necessarily. 

You have to consider imperfect world implications.  In a perfect world, yes, you want the Niners to lose.  It's not a perfect world.  If you want the Niners to lose, you are assuming a LOT. 

First, you are assuming that we beat the Niners two weeks from now. 
Second, you are assuming that the Niners lose one more game than we do ON TOP of us beating them. 

They have 0 losses.  We have 2.  There are 6 games left in the season. 

If the Niners beat us, they would have to lose 4/5 games and we would have to win 5/5 remaining games.  That is literally the only way we could come out ahead of them. 

You also have to consider that if the Seahawks win, they're in a good position to win the division. 

For example, let's say the Seahawks win. 
Then, let's say we beat the Niners. 

Suddenly the Seahawks are ahead in that division and it's a case of the Seahawks having to lose one more game than we do for us to win the #1 seed. 

I know you don't see it as complicated.  You have never for as long as you've been here been able to look at this sort of thing into the future assuming anything but the best.  You're incapable of looking at the bigger picture when considering playoff implications. 

Don't take anything for granted.  The first task is making the playoffs.  For all we know we could lose 3 of the next 6 and be 11-5 and the Vikings could win out.  In that scenario, you'd really wish the Seahawks had lost to the Niners.

Do I have to read all this?

Just "Go Seattle!"

Edited November 11, 2019 by Leader

[MacReady]

Just now, Leader said:

Do I have to read all this?

Only if you're remotely capable of having an open mind and not being a mule headed know it all incapable of seeing multiple paths and outcomes to an NFL season. 

[Leader]

1 minute ago, Outpost31 said:

Only if you're remotely capable of having an open mind and not being a mule headed know it all incapable of seeing multiple paths and outcomes to an NFL season. 

It's simple. I'll leave it at that.  Seattle winning would be best for us at this time - especially since we play San Fran next.

[Golfman]

5 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

But not necessarily. 

You have to consider imperfect world implications.  In a perfect world, yes, you want the Niners to lose.  It's not a perfect world.  If you want the Niners to lose, you are assuming a LOT. 

First, you are assuming that we beat the Niners two weeks from now. 
Second, you are assuming that the Niners lose one more game than we do ON TOP of us beating them. 

They have 0 losses.  We have 2.  There are 6 games left in the season. 

If the Niners beat us, they would have to lose 4/5 games and we would have to win 5/5 remaining games.  That is literally the only way we could come out ahead of them. 

You also have to consider that if the Seahawks win, they're in a good position to win the division. 

For example, let's say the Seahawks win. 
Then, let's say we beat the Niners. 

Suddenly the Seahawks are ahead in that division and it's a case of the Seahawks having to lose one more game than we do for us to win the #1 seed. 

I know you don't see it as complicated.  You have never for as long as you've been here been able to look at this sort of thing into the future assuming anything but the best.  You're incapable of looking at the bigger picture when considering playoff implications. 

Don't take anything for granted.  The first task is making the playoffs.  For all we know we could lose 3 of the next 6 and be 11-5 and the Vikings could win out.  In that scenario, you'd really wish the Seahawks had lost to the Niners. 

 

The team we are going to have to watch in order to get THE BUY is NO. Their schedule is very soft compared to ours, SF and Seattle. 

IF we want the #1 seed we need to win at least 5 games, including the one in San Fran.