If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFGate)   Because the Super Bowl was such a lopsided game, that means the San Francisco 49ers are the second-best team in the league   (sfgate.com) divider line 95
    More: Obvious, Super Bowl, San Francisco, secondbest  
•       •       •

659 clicks; posted to Sports » on 04 Feb 2014 at 8:38 AM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-02-04 08:43:52 AM  
But since the Colts beat the 49ers AND the Seahawks, that means the Colts are the best team in the league!
 
2014-02-04 08:44:15 AM  
Broncos fan here. How could you deny that headline at all?
 
2014-02-04 08:48:52 AM  
Second best doesn't matter.
 
2014-02-04 08:49:37 AM  

The Gentleman Caller: Broncos fan here. How could you deny that headline at all?


Because reality says otherwise? Sure, the Broncos got a hard second place - let's face it, the 49ers still ended up tied for third with the Patriots. You can argue numbers all you like, but at the end of the day, that's how this year's post-season ended, no matter how you try to polish that turd.

Suck it, Forty-whiners. You didn't make the cut. Stop trying to make it all about you.
 
2014-02-04 08:50:55 AM  

the_cnidarian: Second best doesn't matter.


Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.
 
2014-02-04 08:53:27 AM  
As the top second place (in a division) team, they have a solid lock on ninth place. Well done, niners!
 
2014-02-04 08:57:11 AM  
Sports journalism isn't critical thinking, it's pandering to your audience.
 
2014-02-04 09:01:25 AM  
They were the second-best team before the Super Bowl too.
 
2014-02-04 09:03:23 AM  

machoprogrammer: But since the Colts beat the 49ers AND the Seahawks AND the Broncos, that means the Colts are the best team in the league!


/Go Colts
 
2014-02-04 09:05:59 AM  

FormlessOne: the_cnidarian: Second best doesn't matter.

Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.


Denver played the Super Bowl for a chance to be first best. Seahawks are champs until next year, second best is irrelevant.

/Go Cowboys
//cries a little
 
2014-02-04 09:09:16 AM  

the_cnidarian: FormlessOne: the_cnidarian: Second best doesn't matter.

Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.

Denver played the Super Bowl for a chance to be first best. Seahawks are champs until next year, second best is irrelevant.

/Go Cowboys
//cries a little


...I remember that team!
 
2014-02-04 09:21:58 AM  
Stupid logic...The Falcons are undefeated in the playoffs against Russell Wilson so they are the best.
 
2014-02-04 09:24:12 AM  
treasure.diylol.com
 
2014-02-04 09:25:52 AM  

thecpt: Sports most modern journalism isn't critical thinking, it's pandering to your audience.


fixed that to be more inclusive. (it would be really nice if it only happened in sports)
 
2014-02-04 09:29:56 AM  
Having seen SF play SEA three times, yes, with the exception of the first game, which was a SEA blowout, SF is a great team ... in 2012-13.  It remains to be seen if they will repeat that, but I think they may slump a bit.  They're about to tie up a whole bunch of money on a QB who, like Flacco, didn't show much, but enough to make people want to keep him from going to another team.  It's that fear of the "oh my god, you let this guy go!" narrative.  The 49ers starters have also played a huge number of snaps the past few years, which could mean two things: a) they don't trust their depth, or b) the starters, especially the vets, may be getting worn down.

Also, Harbaugh.  I just can't stand the guy.
 
2014-02-04 09:30:06 AM  
For the 49ers the difference between 2nd and 3rd or 9th is... Well I was going to say it's meaningless but it isn't.

Since you only get a prize for winning in the NFL being second is worthless. Especially since 3-9 will get better draft positions.
 
2014-02-04 09:37:52 AM  

FormlessOne: Suck it, Forty-whiners. You didn't make the cut. Stop trying to make it all about you.


Nothing worse than hearing this continual boo-hooing over not making the dance.

Oh wait, there is something worse.  It's worse when it comes from a team already holding 5 rings.
 
2014-02-04 09:39:33 AM  
Oh, and I forgot to add....with the Hawks' win the number 14 is reduced to 13.

13 teams left with no Super Bowl wins.
 
2014-02-04 09:40:47 AM  

FormlessOne: Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.


That doesn't make sense. Denver going to the Super Bowl had nothing at all to do with the 49ers not going. If the playoffs were a tournament without Conference barriers that reseeded each round, maybe Denver going to the SB would make them definitively better than San Francisco, but that is not how the playoffs are structured. An AFC team MUST reach the Super Bowl, even in the extreme scenario in which ever single NFC team is better than every single AFC team.
 
2014-02-04 09:41:28 AM  

FormlessOne: The Gentleman Caller: Broncos fan here. How could you deny that headline at all?

Because reality says otherwise? Sure, the Broncos got a hard second place - let's face it, the 49ers still ended up tied for third with the Patriots. You can argue numbers all you like, but at the end of the day, that's how this year's post-season ended, no matter how you try to polish that turd.

Suck it, Forty-whiners. You didn't make the cut. Stop trying to make it all about you.


Not to mention that the Lombardi isn't awarded based on score, other than to see who had more points at the end. 100-0 or 14-13, a loss is a loss. And the Niners lost before the Bronies.

To be fair, i expected it to be much closer than that. Not to say the Seahawks didn't bring it this year, but that Peyton is...Peyton.

/Steelers fan
//all but one or two of the commercials weren't SB worthy...not even close
///even the M&M's one was disappointing and felt somehow unfinished
 
2014-02-04 09:42:19 AM  

kronicfeld: FormlessOne: Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.

That doesn't make sense. Denver going to the Super Bowl had nothing at all to do with the 49ers not going. If the playoffs were a tournament without Conference barriers that reseeded each round, maybe Denver going to the SB would make them definitively better than San Francisco, but that is not how the playoffs are structured. An AFC team MUST reach the Super Bowl, even in the extreme scenario in which ever single NFC team is better than every single AFC team.


Just suckin' all the fun out of the room, aren'tcha?
 
2014-02-04 09:42:53 AM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: a whole bunch of money on a QB who, like Flacco, didn't show much


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-02-04 09:43:29 AM  

timswar: Since you only get a prize for winning in the NFL being second is worthless. Especially since 3-9 will get better draft positions.


Exactly why the Falcons blatantly threw their last game with the Panthers.  Only thing a victory would've accomplished would be a big drop in the draft order.
 
2014-02-04 09:45:30 AM  
"If you ain't first, you're last"

~Shia Lebeuof
 
2014-02-04 09:52:43 AM  

kronicfeld: FormlessOne: Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.

That doesn't make sense. Denver going to the Super Bowl had nothing at all to do with the 49ers not going. If the playoffs were a tournament without Conference barriers that reseeded each round, maybe Denver going to the SB would make them definitively better than San Francisco, but that is not how the playoffs are structured. An AFC team MUST reach the Super Bowl, even in the extreme scenario in which ever single NFC team is better than every single AFC team.


That is correct. It also follows that, because the Niners and Broncos didn't play each other, the Niners can't definitively say they're second best, just because the Broncos got blown out by the Seahawks. If they went to the Super Bowl instead of the 'hawks, how's to say it wouldn't have been Peytonpalooza on the scoreboard? If we replay the SB 10 times (Hawks/Broncos), there's no way it's 10 Seahawk blowouts.

The way the playoffs are structures, the Super Bowl winner is the champ. The Super Bowl loser, by default, is the second-best team in the NFL.

/It doesn't matter who's second-best, so the Niners are basically tied with 30 other NFL teams to finish the year - not the SB champs.

When I saw that safety at the very beginning, I thought the same thing while watching the Sugar Bowl this year...except the Sooners managed to overcome that early gaffe to dominate their opponent the rest of the way.
 
2014-02-04 09:56:41 AM  
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" - The guy they named the Super Bowl trophy after
 
2014-02-04 10:08:47 AM  
Whole lotta DNRTFA in this thread. You should. The Bay Area has a lot of good sportswriters, Ann Killion among them.
 
2014-02-04 10:10:08 AM  

degenerate-afro: whizbangthedirtfarmer: a whole bunch of money on a QB who, like Flacco, didn't show much

1.bp.blogspot.com


He got paid after he already achieved the result, and then suckboxed all season. Not the best order of events to support your apparent point.

okiemule: That is correct. It also follows that, because the Niners and Broncos didn't play each other, the Niners can't definitively say they're second best, just because the Broncos got blown out by the Seahawks. If they went to the Super Bowl instead of the 'hawks, how's to say it wouldn't have been Peytonpalooza on the scoreboard? If we replay the SB 10 times (Hawks/Broncos), there's no way it's 10 Seahawk blowouts.


That is correct. I don't intend to take a position one way or the other as to whether Denver or SF is better than the other, only to address the methodology.
 
2014-02-04 10:15:23 AM  
Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West
 
2014-02-04 10:15:25 AM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Having seen SF play SEA three times, yes, with the exception of the first game, which was a SEA blowout, SF is a great team ... in 2012-13.  It remains to be seen if they will repeat that, but I think they may slump a bit.  They're about to tie up a whole bunch of money on a QB who, like Flacco, didn't show much, but enough to make people want to keep him from going to another team.  It's that fear of the "oh my god, you let this guy go!" narrative.  The 49ers starters have also played a huge number of snaps the past few years, which could mean two things: a) they don't trust their depth, or b) the starters, especially the vets, may be getting worn down.

Also, Harbaugh.  I just can't stand the guy.


49ers backups got in a lot more this year and they have more young guys that were hurt and didn't play (Dial, Williams, Carradine). Other than Bowman's health, there are no issues at LB and the secondary has enough players to be solid. Offense is still the concern with the OL taking a step back and a lack of cohesion in the passing game. Kaepernick needs to improve his diagnosis and his accuracy. There's going to be a logjam at RB next year and WR will still be weak, pending the draft. Depth on the OL, a backup QB, more WR should be a priority in the draft.
 
2014-02-04 10:18:02 AM  

kronicfeld: degenerate-afro: whizbangthedirtfarmer: a whole bunch of money on a QB who, like Flacco, didn't show much

1.bp.blogspot.com

He got paid after he already achieved the result, and then suckboxed all season. Not the best order of events to support your apparent point.


I'd say that the "team" sucked all season.  There were a few games this season where he carried the team to victory.  Versus the Vikings for example.
 
2014-02-04 10:23:44 AM  
The 49ers represent a tougher matchup for Seattle in both how they are built and in familiarity.  But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.

 - and keep in mind that if Denver played Seattle again 5 times, not one of those games would be as big a stinkbomb as they laid down on Sunday.  NFL games in any situation are rarely that bad.
 
2014-02-04 10:36:06 AM  
Myyeah, kid, mmmyeah see? You'll always be second-place as long as I'm around, see? Mmmmyyeah!!
 
2014-02-04 10:37:28 AM  

the_cnidarian: Second best doesn't matter.


Also, this.
 
2014-02-04 10:54:05 AM  

FormlessOne: The Gentleman Caller: Broncos fan here. How could you deny that headline at all?

Because reality says otherwise? Sure, the Broncos got a hard second place - let's face it, the 49ers still ended up tied for third with the Patriots. You can argue numbers all you like, but at the end of the day, that's how this year's post-season ended, no matter how you try to polish that turd.

Suck it, Forty-whiners. You didn't make the cut. Stop trying to make it all about you.


Ah, Seachicken fans. Making Philly fans look like angels. Stay classy.
 
2014-02-04 10:59:12 AM  
Also, for the record, I think anyone claiming to be "second best" is just grasping at straws. We had our shot, we got beat. If we would have taken care of our business in the regular season, the tale may have been different. But that's why you play the games.

/hope Bowman recovers well, horrific injury.
 
2014-02-04 11:00:13 AM  
So Colin is growing up, that is good. Seeing him in the post game interview with his over sized hat on backwards and crooked and headphones around his neck, made him look like a street punk.
 
2014-02-04 11:11:44 AM  
The funniest thing to me about this SF article is the opposite of what's pumping out of the Boston papers right now:

http://bostonherald.com/sports/columnists/ron_borges/2014/02/borges_ pa triots_no_match_for_seahawks_either

http://www.boston.com/sports/columnists/wilbur/2014/02/face_it_patri ot s_would_have_suffered_the_same_fate.html

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2014/02/ wh at_the_patriots_can_learn_from_the_seahawks.html

http://www.boston.com/sports/touching_all_the_bases/2014/02/patriots _s uper_bowl.html

Probably no need to read them all (or any of them.)  It's mostly a tip of the cap to Seattle and acknowledging that they were good and the Pats weren't up to it this year and need to do things to get back into it next year.
 
2014-02-04 11:25:24 AM  

Nana's Vibrator: The 49ers represent a tougher matchup for Seattle in both how they are built and in familiarity.  But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.

 - and keep in mind that if Denver played Seattle again 5 times, not one of those games would be as big a stinkbomb as they laid down on Sunday.  NFL games in any situation are rarely that bad.


i'd agree about a 5-6 based on "on paper" strength, but based on performance this year? easily #2, dunno how anybody can deny how well they played down the stretch

i mean who would you list ahead of them? Denver? prior to the super bowl maybe... but New Orleans? nah, Carolina? nope, Philadelphia? nope... forget the AFC
 
2014-02-04 11:32:01 AM  

okiemule: kronicfeld: FormlessOne: Sure it does - that's why Denver went to the Super Bowl, after all. The 49ers didn't even make "second best" within the scope of this discussion. At best, they were "second best" in our division, so I guess they can nurse that until next season.

That doesn't make sense. Denver going to the Super Bowl had nothing at all to do with the 49ers not going. If the playoffs were a tournament without Conference barriers that reseeded each round, maybe Denver going to the SB would make them definitively better than San Francisco, but that is not how the playoffs are structured. An AFC team MUST reach the Super Bowl, even in the extreme scenario in which ever single NFC team is better than every single AFC team.

That is correct. It also follows that, because the Niners and Broncos didn't play each other, the Niners can't definitively say they're second best, just because the Broncos got blown out by the Seahawks. If they went to the Super Bowl instead of the 'hawks, how's to say it wouldn't have been Peytonpalooza on the scoreboard? If we replay the SB 10 times (Hawks/Broncos), there's no way it's 10 Seahawk blowouts.

The way the playoffs are structures, the Super Bowl winner is the champ. The Super Bowl loser, by default, is the second-best team in the NFL.

/It doesn't matter who's second-best, so the Niners are basically tied with 30 other NFL teams to finish the year - not the SB champs.

When I saw that safety at the very beginning, I thought the same thing while watching the Sugar Bowl this year...except the Sooners managed to overcome that early gaffe to dominate their opponent the rest of the way.


i dunno, i wouldn't say the Chargers were better than the Cowboys in 1994, or that the Bills were better than the 49ers in 1992/93, or that the Patriots were better than the 49ers in 1985, etc. etc. etc.

you are right about matchups tho - had the Niners gotten to the Super Bowl and faced Denver, it could've been a much closer game, but we don't really know - we all thought Denver was going to beat Seattle to begin with, if we have to make a judgment it's better imo to look back at what actually happened
 
2014-02-04 11:36:33 AM  
True.


Broncos got their asses kicked good.  they needed it.  and Manning got his ego reduced a tad.
 
2014-02-04 11:45:56 AM  

AdamK: Nana's Vibrator: The 49ers represent a tougher matchup for Seattle in both how they are built and in familiarity.  But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.

 - and keep in mind that if Denver played Seattle again 5 times, not one of those games would be as big a stinkbomb as they laid down on Sunday.  NFL games in any situation are rarely that bad.

i'd agree about a 5-6 based on "on paper" strength, but based on performance this year? easily #2, dunno how anybody can deny how well they played down the stretch

i mean who would you list ahead of them? Denver? prior to the super bowl maybe... but New Orleans? nah, Carolina? nope, Philadelphia? nope... forget the AFC


THIS. Not sure how you can put anyone but (maybe) the Broncos ahead of the 49ers. The Niners, at worst, were the third best team in football this year.

/Pats fan here
//Yeah, they'd have gotten blown out just as bad as Denver
 
2014-02-04 11:47:41 AM  
yup.

Whoever said Pats upthread must be on the medical marijuana.
 
2014-02-04 11:52:20 AM  

Linux_Yes: True.


Broncos got their asses kicked good.  they needed it.  and Manning got his ego reduced a tad.


Their opening play was hilarious
i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2014-02-04 11:52:54 AM  
FTA:

For a team that wasn't anywhere near a football field, the 49ers had an especially significant week:
-- Archenemy wins the Super Bowl.
-- Franchise quarterback starts a makeover.



What's this mean? I've just seen him being a douche and a crybaby since losing. Is that the makeover, or has he changed since then?
 
2014-02-04 12:09:06 PM  
Hell, about a 1/3 of the NFC would have rolled up the Broncos Sunday night. I doubt as resoundingly as the Seahawks ended up doing, but still; if an opening safety and watching your best WR get knocked on his ass on his first completion wrecks your confidence that badly, then you just might be not ready for the physicality & tenacity of the best NFC teams.

It's not an issue of talent, it's just that your Niners, Panthers, and even non-playoff teams like the Cardinals and Rams have no problem kicking you in the face for four quarters regardless of the score.

/fan first of an AFC team
//willingly admits 90% of the AFC plays two-hand touch in comparison to the other league.
 
2014-02-04 12:12:02 PM  
The NFC Title Game was an epic game between two teams that are built similarly both peaking/close to peaking at the same time and it came down to the final moments...but that's all it was - a semifinal. Our opinions don't matter because the Niners never got to the ultimate game and the Broncos did. Not to mention, we've seen the Niners lay some nasty eggs this season too. Beating Manning and the Broncos certainly wouldn't have been a forgone conclusion, especially with Bowman sidelined.
 
2014-02-04 12:14:08 PM  
Richard Sherman agrees. As does anyone who watched football this year.

Nana's Vibrator: But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.


You're out of your mind.

These are the five best teams in some order (listed in the order I'd have them): Seattle, San Francisco, Carolina, Denver, New Orleans.

Oh, and no, getting to the final in a tournament does not make you the de facto second-best team. Hell, winning the title doesn't make you the best team - it just makes you champions, people.
 
2014-02-04 12:25:48 PM  

nyseattitude: Linux_Yes: True.


Broncos got their asses kicked good.  they needed it.  and Manning got his ego reduced a tad.

Their opening play was hilarious
[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x420]



i'm afraid it set the pattern for things to come.   lol   i've never seen Manning so out of his element.
 
2014-02-04 12:31:26 PM  
The NFC West:
Seahawks: won the Super Bowl this year
49ers: played in NFC championship game this year and Super Bowl last year
Rams: quickly rebuilding with a very young team
Cardinals: almost same situation as Rams

This division could be brutal next year.
 
2014-02-04 12:32:20 PM  

AdamK: Nana's Vibrator: The 49ers represent a tougher matchup for Seattle in both how they are built and in familiarity.  But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.

 - and keep in mind that if Denver played Seattle again 5 times, not one of those games would be as big a stinkbomb as they laid down on Sunday.  NFL games in any situation are rarely that bad.

i'd agree about a 5-6 based on "on paper" strength, but based on performance this year? easily #2, dunno how anybody can deny how well they played down the stretch

i mean who would you list ahead of them? Denver? prior to the super bowl maybe... but New Orleans? nah, Carolina? nope, Philadelphia? nope... forget the AFC


Yes, paper.  That was the point.  They ended up in the NFC Championship, of course you give them the 3 or 4.  I said that.  And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.  Now without Navarro Bowman?  That's a cliff dive.
 
2014-02-04 12:38:26 PM  

mjohnson71: The NFC West:
Seahawks: won the Super Bowl this year
49ers: played in NFC championship game this year and Super Bowl last year
Rams: quickly rebuilding with a very young team
Cardinals: almost same situation as Rams

This division could be brutal next year.


Not to mention that the Cards finished just outside the playoffs with 10 wins.
 
2014-02-04 12:39:00 PM  

wiseolddude: So Colin is growing up, that is good. Seeing him in the post game interview with his over sized hat on backwards and crooked and headphones around his neck, made him look like a street punk.


Oh no....not a street punk...

/never get tired of this one

i1168.photobucket.com
 
2014-02-04 12:42:51 PM  

wiseolddude: So Colin is growing up, that is good. Seeing him in the post game interview with his over sized hat on backwards and crooked and headphones around his neck, made him look like a street punk.


Meanwhile every other QB was wearing a suit and tie.
 
2014-02-04 12:43:24 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.


Well that's a batsh*t insane take.
 
2014-02-04 12:44:55 PM  

mjohnson71: Meanwhile every other QB was wearing a suit and tie.


In fairness, Russell Wilson DOES do that.

/hell, he was sitting courtside with Jay-Z the next day...wearing a suit and tie.
//Russell, I know that sh*t isn't comfortable, you can take a little bit of a break from being Mr. Perfect
 
2014-02-04 12:46:37 PM  

IAmRight: Richard Sherman agrees. As does anyone who watched football this year.

Nana's Vibrator: But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.

You're out of your mind.

These are the five best teams in some order (listed in the order I'd have them): Seattle, San Francisco, Carolina, Denver, New Orleans.

Oh, and no, getting to the final in a tournament does not make you the de facto second-best team. Hell, winning the title doesn't make you the best team - it just makes you champions, people.


So getting to the championship game doesn't make you the best or 2nd best, getting to the NFC championship this year doesn't make you 3rd/4th best.  I'm with you.  The way SF performed over the year against the schedule they played (New Orleans and Carolina both had tougher schedules), San Fran is #6 by that measure.  You're making my point.

Again, San Fran is a matchup nightmare for Seattle, that doesn't make them universally the 2nd best team.  And to reiterate, take out Navarro Bowman and we might not even be talking about #6.
 
2014-02-04 12:48:33 PM  

IAmRight: Nana's Vibrator: And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.

Well that's a batsh*t insane take.


Now you're just antagonizing me.  I'm happy for you and Seattle that your team won.
 
2014-02-04 12:49:22 PM  

IAmRight: mjohnson71: Meanwhile every other QB was wearing a suit and tie.

In fairness, Russell Wilson DOES do that.


Didn't know that.

Almost makes you wonder if the NFL will go with a dress code: at least for QBs.
 
2014-02-04 12:53:59 PM  

mjohnson71: The NFC West:
Seahawks: won the Super Bowl this year
49ers: played in NFC championship game this year and Super Bowl last year
Rams: quickly rebuilding with a very young team
Cardinals: almost same situation as Rams

This division could be brutal next year.


COULD?

You have a knack for understatement, sir!
 
2014-02-04 01:12:44 PM  

FormlessOne: The Gentleman Caller: Broncos fan here. How could you deny that headline at all?

Because reality says otherwise? Sure, the Broncos got a hard second place - let's face it, the 49ers still ended up tied for third with the Patriots. You can argue numbers all you like, but at the end of the day, that's how this year's post-season ended, no matter how you try to polish that turd.

Suck it, Forty-whiners. You didn't make the cut. Stop trying to make it all about you.


Even as a Giants fan, I'm gonna have to call complete and utter bullshiat on your part.

Reality says: Seahawks, 'Niners, Broncos, Pats.  Seahawks or Niners v. Broncos or Pats is a blowout.
 
2014-02-04 01:16:23 PM  

mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West


I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.
 
2014-02-04 01:17:12 PM  
kaep is "growing up" because he's angling for a contract. he's still a piece of shiat. he's just listening to his agents right now.

go kiss your bicep and post pics of your shoes. while russell is probably studying film RIGHT NOW.
 
2014-02-04 01:17:26 PM  

Rwa2play: mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West

I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.


The 2 Wests play each other next year, IIRC.
 
2014-02-04 01:18:12 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.


They beat Carolina in the playoffs only a month ago. On the road and it wasn't close. It makes no sense for you to have the Panthers ahead of the 49ers. The same logic applies to ranking Philly over New Orleans. Whatever criteria you're using makes no sense.
 
2014-02-04 01:23:46 PM  

Shame Us: Rwa2play: mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West

I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.

The 2 Wests play each other next year, IIRC.


Interesting.  So the Raiders will go 0-4 v. the NFC West, the Broncos will hope they get that SB rematch in Denver 'cause there is no way they're winning in Seattle.  The Chiefs games will be interesting.
 
2014-02-04 01:28:12 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: AdamK: Nana's Vibrator: The 49ers represent a tougher matchup for Seattle in both how they are built and in familiarity.  But with that, while the 49ers were technically top 4 due to making the NFC championship game, they're probably closer to 5 or 6 as far as this year went performance and roster-wise.  Still a very good team with another shot at a SB next year.

 - and keep in mind that if Denver played Seattle again 5 times, not one of those games would be as big a stinkbomb as they laid down on Sunday.  NFL games in any situation are rarely that bad.

i'd agree about a 5-6 based on "on paper" strength, but based on performance this year? easily #2, dunno how anybody can deny how well they played down the stretch

i mean who would you list ahead of them? Denver? prior to the super bowl maybe... but New Orleans? nah, Carolina? nope, Philadelphia? nope... forget the AFC

Yes, paper.  That was the point.  They ended up in the NFC Championship, of course you give them the 3 or 4.  I said that.  And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.  Now without Navarro Bowman?  That's a cliff dive.


these things are kind of at odds with eachother

anyways, if everybody is healthy and active, i wouldn't even put Denver as the best of the AFC on paper, end-of-year performance is so key to deciding what the real-world potential of a team really is and hey - the 49ers made their case; it's hard to say whether Bowman being out would sink their ship more than the injuries that New England/Denver suffered, i think it's okay to still take the Niners over those two in a matchup based on performance alone - even if on paper they are lesser, same reason i'd take Green Bay over most of the AFC's teams in the playoffs this year
 
2014-02-04 01:29:33 PM  

Shame Us: Rwa2play: mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West

I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.

The 2 Wests play each other next year, IIRC.


Yup: the Broncos visit Seattle in the 2014 season. Any chance that could be the Thursday night season opener game?
 
2014-02-04 01:31:07 PM  

mjohnson71: IAmRight: mjohnson71: Meanwhile every other QB was wearing a suit and tie.

In fairness, Russell Wilson DOES do that.

Didn't know that.

Almost makes you wonder if the NFL will go with a dress code: at least for QBs.


i hope not

the NFL is too corporate as it is

besides, who doesn't love Broadway Joe?
 
2014-02-04 01:34:31 PM  

mjohnson71: Shame Us: Rwa2play: mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West

I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.

The 2 Wests play each other next year, IIRC.

Yup: the Broncos visit Seattle in the 2014 season. Any chance that could be the Thursday night season opener game?


Either that or a SF/SEA matchup; I would think NBC would want SF/SEA because of how close those games are.
 
2014-02-04 01:39:19 PM  

kronicfeld: An AFC team MUST reach the Super Bowl, even in the extreme scenario in which ever single NFC team is better than every single AFC team.


It is pretty clear to anyone with eyes that the 49Niners were better than the Broncos...  two weeks ago they were one underthrown pass away from defeating the SeaHawks in Seattle.
 
2014-02-04 02:00:17 PM  

SuperChuck: Nana's Vibrator: And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.

They beat Carolina in the playoffs only a month ago. On the road and it wasn't close. It makes no sense for you to have the Panthers ahead of the 49ers. The same logic applies to ranking Philly over New Orleans. Whatever criteria you're using makes no sense.


You're getting a mulligan because you joined late and I'm not holding you to the expectation of reading the whole conversation before jumping into it.

AdamK:
these things are kind of at odds with eachother

anyways, if everybody is healthy and active, i wouldn't even put Denver as the best of the AFC on paper, end-of-year performance is so key to deciding what the real-world potential of a team really is and hey - the 49ers made their case; it's hard to say whether Bowman being out would sink their ship more than the injuries that New England/Denver suffered, i think it's okay to still take the Niners over those two in a matchup based on performance alone - even if on paper they are lesser, same reason i'd take Green Bay over most of the AFC's teams in the playoffs this year


No they are not.  You forgot to highlight (or selectively overlooked) as far as this year went.  Over the course of the year, injuries to everyone but Navarro Bowman included, San Francisco is 6th.  Everyone is welcome to disagree.

And again, the whole exercise was rooted in some SF writer's what if nonsense.  And I'm not diving down the injury rabbit hole to see how a healthy team would have done.
 
2014-02-04 02:09:20 PM  
The niners are still #1 at choking, so they have that going for them.
 
2014-02-04 02:15:17 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: SuperChuck: Nana's Vibrator: And if that's what we're doing, yes, Denver, New England, Carolina, and Philadelphia were ahead of them, with New Orleans not far behind them.

They beat Carolina in the playoffs only a month ago. On the road and it wasn't close. It makes no sense for you to have the Panthers ahead of the 49ers. The same logic applies to ranking Philly over New Orleans. Whatever criteria you're using makes no sense.

You're getting a mulligan because you joined late and I'm not holding you to the expectation of reading the whole conversation before jumping into it.

AdamK:
these things are kind of at odds with eachother

anyways, if everybody is healthy and active, i wouldn't even put Denver as the best of the AFC on paper, end-of-year performance is so key to deciding what the real-world potential of a team really is and hey - the 49ers made their case; it's hard to say whether Bowman being out would sink their ship more than the injuries that New England/Denver suffered, i think it's okay to still take the Niners over those two in a matchup based on performance alone - even if on paper they are lesser, same reason i'd take Green Bay over most of the AFC's teams in the playoffs this year

No they are not.  You forgot to highlight (or selectively overlooked) as far as this year went.  Over the course of the year, injuries to everyone but Navarro Bowman included, San Francisco is 6th.  Everyone is welcome to disagree.

And again, the whole exercise was rooted in some SF writer's what if nonsense.  And I'm not diving down the injury rabbit hole to see how a healthy team would have done.


uh, why would i overlook that? what other nfl season would we talk about? i was just pointing out that you were talking about performance, but then wanted to talk about potential on paper... which are at odds, hence why i brought up the problems with talking about potential on paper - and why we were talking about performance - and how performance at the end of the season puts the 49ers ahead of either AFC Championship game team - one injury or not

i dunno, what's the point of talking about the regular season in a postseason thread and getting everybody confused? not to mention what's the point of saying Carolina was a better team than the 49ers when the 49ers beat them handidly in the playoffs? i feel like we're going in circles here
 
2014-02-04 02:39:41 PM  
AdamK:

The point is that the writer thinks San Francisco is the #2 team in the league because reasons.  And he's wrong by about 4 places.
 
2014-02-04 03:46:24 PM  

Rwa2play: mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West

I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.


As was mentioned above, the two Wests play each other next season. For 2014:

Seattle and St.Louis: Denver/Oakland at home, KC/SD on the road
San Francisco and Arizona: KC/SD at home, Denver/Oakland on the road

Over the next 5 seasons, the NFC West will play:

2014: West
2015: North (Cleveland/Pittsburgh replace Denver/Oakland, Cincy/Baltimore in place of KC/SD)
2016: East (Buffalo/Miami in place of Denver/Oakland, New England/NY Jets in place of KC/SD)
2017: South (Houston/Indy replace Denver/Oakland, Jacksonville/Tennessee in place of KC/SD)
2018: Back to the West, but the road and home games above are reversed.

Complete schedules through 2019 (not dates, just home/away and teams): http://www.johnnyroadtrip.com/schedules/nfl_future_nfcw.htm
 
2014-02-04 03:52:42 PM  
That link is not set in stone, but is based on prior years rotations.
 
2014-02-04 03:58:08 PM  

TheWhoppah: It is pretty clear to anyone with eyes that the 49Niners were better than the Broncos... two weeks ago they were one underthrown pass away from defeating the SeaHawks in Seattle.


I guess it's cool to ignore the three games they couldn't even score ten points, including when they got three in Seattle.

/49s aren't bad, but you can't just say "Denver choked once; SF is better." SF choked multiple times during the regular season; that's why they weren't division champs.
 
2014-02-04 04:02:01 PM  
Pretty good run for one division on sending teams to the Super Bowl:
2009: Cardinals
2013: 49ers
2014: Seahawks (won)
 
2014-02-04 04:11:01 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: AdamK:

The point is that the writer thinks San Francisco is the #2 team in the league because reasons.  And he's wrong by about 4 places.



Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Seriously dude, your are presenting this like it is an indisputable fact that SF was the 6th best team. No argument, no discussion, just objectively measurable fact, SF is 6th best!!!!
But it is really just your personal opinion.

How about you back it up with facts instead. For instance, SF was 6th in DVOA, both total and weighted,for the regular season:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2013/final-2013-dvoa-r at ings

There you go, now there is objective evidence that SF was not as good as the Bronco's or Carolina by a noticeable margin. That is how you back up an argument, you don't just shout it out as loudly as possible.
 
2014-02-04 04:20:54 PM  

skrame: TheWhoppah: It is pretty clear to anyone with eyes that the 49Niners were better than the Broncos... two weeks ago they were one underthrown pass away from defeating the SeaHawks in Seattle.

I guess it's cool to ignore the three games they couldn't even score ten points, including when they got three in Seattle.

/49s aren't bad, but you can't just say "Denver choked once; SF is better." SF choked multiple times during the regular season; that's why they weren't division champs.


Except that isn't what I wrote is it?
Anyone that watched both games knows which team is better.
SF played the Seahawks tight the entire game in Seattle and still had a chance to win with 30 seconds remaining...
Denver was blown out before halftime.
Your lame argument is based on performance during the first half of the year... while SF's #1 wide receiver was out recovering from off-season leg surgery.
They were undefeated in the portion of the regular season after that WR came back including a win over the SeaHawks.... Denver was 4-2 over the same stretch.
 
2014-02-04 04:39:31 PM  

arentol: Nana's Vibrator: AdamK:

The point is that the writer thinks San Francisco is the #2 team in the league because reasons.  And he's wrong by about 4 places.


Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Seriously dude, your are presenting this like it is an indisputable fact that SF was the 6th best team. No argument, no discussion, just objectively measurable fact, SF is 6th best!!!!
But it is really just your personal opinion.

How about you back it up with facts instead. For instance, SF was 6th in DVOA, both total and weighted,for the regular season:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2013/final-2013-dvoa-r at ings

There you go, now there is objective evidence that SF was not as good as the Bronco's or Carolina by a noticeable margin. That is how you back up an argument, you don't just shout it out as loudly as possible.


Why in God's name would I need to do that when no one else...oh.  You're agreeing with me and helping me out.  Thanks?
 
2014-02-04 04:39:49 PM  

TheWhoppah: Anyone that watched both games knows which team is played better in their respective game.

 
2014-02-04 04:51:43 PM  

TheWhoppah: skrame: TheWhoppah: It is pretty clear to anyone with eyes that the 49Niners were better than the Broncos... two weeks ago they were one underthrown pass away from defeating the SeaHawks in Seattle.

I guess it's cool to ignore the three games they couldn't even score ten points, including when they got three in Seattle.

/49s aren't bad, but you can't just say "Denver choked once; SF is better." SF choked multiple times during the regular season; that's why they weren't division champs.

Except that isn't what I wrote is it?
Anyone that watched both games knows which team is better.
SF played the Seahawks tight the entire game in Seattle and still had a chance to win with 30 seconds remaining...
Denver was blown out before halftime.
Your lame argument is based on performance during the first half of the year... while SF's #1 wide receiver was out recovering from off-season leg surgery.
They were undefeated in the portion of the regular season after that WR came back including a win over the SeaHawks.... Denver was 4-2 over the same stretch.


What are you measuring?  You're saying since San Fran lost by fewer points in one game under completely different circumstances, they're better than Denver?
Do you honestly think that if Denver played Seattle 5 more times they'd get blown out 5 more times?  Do you think that if San Francisco played Seattle 5 more times they would never lose by a large margin?
 
2014-02-04 04:57:57 PM  

okiemule: Rwa2play: mentallo69: Seahawks fan here, and I would boldly agree. The Niners are a great team and I think they would have slaughtered the Broncos. The 49ers are very similar to the Hawks and with the Rams and Cardinals all getting better. I think the next 3/5 super bowls will be won by the NFC West

I wouldn't like to be the AFC division that has to face the NFC West next season.  Those are four tough games they'll have to play.

As was mentioned above, the two Wests play each other next season. For 2014:

Seattle and St.Louis: Denver/Oakland at home, KC/SD on the road


Welp, Denver's gonna have to put an "L" next to that Seattle game.  Hopefully that game in KC will be when both teams are relatively healthy; that should be a phenomenal matchup.

San Francisco and Arizona: KC/SD at home, Denver/Oakland on the road

Again, hopefully SF/DEN's on the schedule when both teams are healthy.
 
2014-02-04 05:42:11 PM  

TheWhoppah: skrame: TheWhoppah: It is pretty clear to anyone with eyes that the 49Niners were better than the Broncos... two weeks ago they were one underthrown pass away from defeating the SeaHawks in Seattle.

I guess it's cool to ignore the three games they couldn't even score ten points, including when they got three in Seattle.

/49s aren't bad, but you can't just say "Denver choked once; SF is better." SF choked multiple times during the regular season; that's why they weren't division champs.

Except that isn't what I wrote is it?
Anyone that watched both games knows which team is better.
SF played the Seahawks tight the entire game in Seattle and still had a chance to win with 30 seconds remaining...
Denver was blown out before halftime.
Your lame argument is based on performance during the first half of the year... while SF's #1 wide receiver was out recovering from off-season leg surgery.
They were undefeated in the portion of the regular season after that WR came back including a win over the SeaHawks.... Denver was 4-2 over the same stretch.


No; what you wrote is "It is pretty clear to anyone with eyes that the 49Niners were better than the Broncos ". But like a lot of other stuff here, that's not true. It's not clear-cut. It's close; that's for sure. Go upthread a little and see how the stats like DVOA show Denver was better. Apparently those stats geeks are typing blindly, since they clearly have no eyes.

We're talking about being the best in the league over the season, which is why the first half of the season matters just as much. I'm not as good at debating as you apparently, since I assumed that half of a freaking season meant more than one game. I can see why you think using half a season instead of one game is lame.

Furthermore, I can see why you think I'm lame for not ignoring the games without your #1 WR. Wait; which one? Crabtree, who picked up 40 yards and zero TDs in the second game against Seattle? Yeah; what a difference maker. I guess the first game should be tossed out.

It also makes perfect sense to cherry-pick a six game period when SF was undefeated and say that DEN lost twice in that time. That proves SF was better. I guess it doesn't matter that Denver lost less games overall.
 
2014-02-04 06:05:25 PM  
I'll take Richard Sherman's opinion on this over any keyboard warrior here. Sherman's actually had to play the other teams.
 
2014-02-04 07:40:10 PM  
So - if you go with overall stats, the 49ers are sixth in the NFL, and if you go with Super Bowl pairings, the 49ers are tied for third with the Patriots. Reality sucks, doesn't it?
 
2014-02-04 08:09:40 PM  

cloud_van_dame: I'll take Richard Sherman's opinion on this over any keyboard warrior here. Sherman's actually had to play the other teams.


Speaking of keyboard warriors....

I read a bunch of Niner fans on FB pages and the like that were actually ticked off at Sherman's remarks. Mostly because they're still bitter and will apparently never forgive him. But several took exception to him saying the 49ers were number two-in many of their minds the 49ers were just as good or better than Seattle. Several remarks about how the Seahawks "didn't really win" that NFC Championship game. One dude even said he's keeping his recording of that game on his DVR for the rest of his life, just so I can show it to any 'Seachicken' fan that dares come over and claim San Fransisco was beaten.

I was never  a 49er fan growing up, but I never had any serious distaste for them. But this current batch, I just can't stand them. The past two posteasons, I've even rooted for the Packers to beat them. And I'm a Bears fan.
 
2014-02-04 08:52:17 PM  

Nana's Vibrator: AdamK:

The point is that the writer thinks San Francisco is the #2 team in the league because reasons.  And he's wrong by about 4 places.


k
 
2014-02-04 09:01:35 PM  

cloud_van_dame: I'll take Richard Sherman's opinion on this over any keyboard warrior here. Sherman's actually had to play the other teams.


"The NFC championship was the Super Bowl," Sherman said. "The 49ers were the second-best team in the NFL."

//Go Oilers Titans Texans!
 
2014-02-05 12:42:01 PM  

Your_Huckleberry: One dude even said he's keeping his recording of that game on his DVR for the rest of his life, just so I can show it to any 'Seachicken' fan that dares come over and claim San Fransisco was beaten.


Well, that seems like fun. Because then the Seattle fan can laugh and laugh at 23-17 and how that means that yes, they beat San Francisco despite spotting them a 10-point lead.
 
2014-02-05 12:44:32 PM  
The player who makes the most money in a season is in first place, actually.
 
2014-02-05 08:51:32 PM  

IAmRight: Your_Huckleberry: One dude even said he's keeping his recording of that game on his DVR for the rest of his life, just so I can show it to any 'Seachicken' fan that dares come over and claim San Fransisco was beaten.

Well, that seems like fun. Because then the Seattle fan can laugh and laugh at 23-17 and how that means that yes, they beat San Francisco despite spotting them a 10-point lead.


Yeah, I used to thinks San Fransisco fans were more levelheaded. This stuff I'm reading in on a SF Giants site, I can only imagine the chuckles on the actual 49er boards.
 
2014-02-05 08:59:59 PM  

Your_Huckleberry: Yeah, I used to thinks San Fransisco fans were more levelheaded.


Everyone seemed more levelheaded a while ago because news/TV/internet wasn't so focused on popularizing dumb people's behavior.

/just like we all think music was more awesome long ago because now we hear EVERYTHING that's out there instead of a small portion of it that is good enough to survive 50 years and be listenable
 
Displayed 95 of 95 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report