Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Football Perspective)   How modern sports journalists would have reacted to Joe Montana's first year starting for the 49ers   (footballperspective.com ) divider line
    More: Silly  
•       •       •

2502 clicks; posted to Sports » on 02 Aug 2014 at 11:50 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



35 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-02 11:23:39 AM  
That's a hilarious find.


After two years, some were ready to say the results are in: at 8-24, the 49ers have the worst record of any team since Walsh came to town. Is it all his fault? No, this team was bad when he came here, and I think he's done some good things. But the outside-the-box thinker needs to get with the tradition of pro football if he wants to win. I thought that was going to happen this year. Sadly, I'm afraid I may be mistaken.


This is right up there with some of the crap they wrote about the Seahawks before last year.
 
2014-08-02 11:55:46 AM  
That is the best read I've had in a long time.

Thank you subby
 
2014-08-02 12:14:36 PM  
Undeterred by that evidence, Walsh went about bringing Basketball On Cleats to Candlestick Park. Was his first year a success? San Francisco finished third in passing yards, 4th in first downs, and 6th in total yards. Quarterback  Steve DeBerg led the NFC in completion percentage, too. But while Walsh's horizontal passing game led to lots of yards and first downs, the team won only two games.  Running backs Paul Hofer and Wilbur Jackson each caught 50 passes, but to what end?

Right, so your offense is good, but you are not winning games, so the offense is the problem, not the defense.

/I f*cking hate websites that insert random code when you copy text
 
2014-08-02 12:24:31 PM  
Mostly well done, until it got to the sentence "But the outside-the-box thinker needs to get with the tradition of pro football if he wants to win." That's too heavy-handed. I'd have gone with something about how Walsh needs to understand that the modern NFL game is different from anything he had seen at Stanford.
 
2014-08-02 12:38:36 PM  

veale728: Undeterred by that evidence, Walsh went about bringing Basketball On Cleats to Candlestick Park. Was his first year a success? San Francisco finished third in passing yards, 4th in first downs, and 6th in total yards. Quarterback  Steve DeBerg led the NFC in completion percentage, too. But while Walsh's horizontal passing game led to lots of yards and first downs, the team won only two games.  Running backs Paul Hofer and Wilbur Jackson each caught 50 passes, but to what end?

Right, so your offense is good, but you are not winning games, so the offense is the problem, not the defense.

/I f*cking hate websites that insert random code when you copy text


Nothing random about it; it's deliberate.
 
2014-08-02 12:48:34 PM  
Steve DeBerg led the NFC in completion percentage, too

It's early, and my eyes still aren't focusing perfectly, I read that as "Led the NFC in 'complaining'" and thought they were talking about Tom Brady.

AFC, NFC, thought maybe the author had used the wrong conference...
 
2014-08-02 12:51:14 PM  
That was pretty good. Mike Tanier's take on Jerry Rice's rookie year was better though. Largely because it reviewed what people were actually saying at the time. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/walkthrough/2006/too-deep-zone-jerry - rice-rookie-bust
 
2014-08-02 01:17:02 PM  

veale728: Right, so your offense is good, but you are not winning games, so the offense is the problem, not the defense.


Why not both? I have heard this same song before and quite recently.

www.crossingbroad.com
 
2014-08-02 01:25:57 PM  

Generation_D: That's a hilarious find.


After two years, some were ready to say the results are in: at 8-24, the 49ers have the worst record of any team since Walsh came to town. Is it all his fault? No, this team was bad when he came here, and I think he's done some good things. But the outside-the-box thinker needs to get with the tradition of pro football if he wants to win. I thought that was going to happen this year. Sadly, I'm afraid I may be mistaken.


This is right up there with some of the crap they wrote about the Seahawks before last year.


No they didn't, they just hate Pete Carroll in most places.

And they barely acknowledged the 49ers were complete shiat before Walsh got there.
 
2014-08-02 01:32:00 PM  

Neeek: That was pretty good. Mike Tanier's take on Jerry Rice's rookie year was better though. Largely because it reviewed what people were actually saying at the time. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/walkthrough/2006/too-deep-zone-jerry - rice-rookie-bust


Week 14 found the Niners facing the Rams in a game that would decide the NFC West. It was a huge game between two of the best teams in the conference. There would even be halftime entertainment: the rock band Starship performed their hit "We Built This City." Despite this, fan excitement was high.

That's pretty awesome.
 
2014-08-02 01:49:49 PM  
Over analyzed it to death, then analyze whether all the analysis helps or hurts the player?

Maybe some opinions on how grit, toughness, and the will to win are crucial in the NFL and this guy doesn't have it?
 
2014-08-02 02:32:39 PM  
I cannot imagine what First Take would say about a young Joe Montana.
 
2014-08-02 03:15:17 PM  
Nobody would listen to me when I said that Montana kid was never going to amount to anything..
 
2014-08-02 03:56:46 PM  

BSABSVR: I cannot imagine what First Take would say about a young Joe Montana.


They already had a piece on a Notre Dame grad with durability issues. His name was Brady Quinn.
 
2014-08-02 04:14:32 PM  
imgs.xkcd.com
 
2014-08-02 04:37:33 PM  
Very nice.  Can almost be applied to every team (or person) in the NFL (or all sports really).
 
2014-08-02 05:21:12 PM  

smd31: Very nice.  Can almost be applied to every team (or person) in the NFL (or all sports really).


Yep! I can just imagine what sports writers of today would think of an NFL team selecting a punter in the first round (Oakland Raiders, 1973, and the person selected is now in the NFL Hall of Fame (finally!)).
 
2014-08-02 05:45:55 PM  

ClavellBCMI: smd31: Very nice.  Can almost be applied to every team (or person) in the NFL (or all sports really).

Yep! I can just imagine what sports writers of today would think of an NFL team selecting a punter in the first round (Oakland Raiders, 1973, and the person selected is now in the NFL Hall of Fame (finally!)).


They drafted Seabass in the first round in ... what was it, 99 or so?

Look up what the pundits said.

Turned out pretty darn good, in hindsight.
 
2014-08-02 06:11:20 PM  

xaks: ClavellBCMI: smd31: Very nice.  Can almost be applied to every team (or person) in the NFL (or all sports really).

Yep! I can just imagine what sports writers of today would think of an NFL team selecting a punter in the first round (Oakland Raiders, 1973, and the person selected is now in the NFL Hall of Fame (finally!)).

They drafted Seabass in the first round in ... what was it, 99 or so?

Look up what the pundits said.

Turned out pretty darn good, in hindsight.


Great kicker, but for years the league has been filled with guys who can boot it through the uprights at 50+ yards.  To burn the Raiders'  #1 pick on his position was foolish.
 
2014-08-02 06:27:28 PM  
I would disagree with your assertion that it was a foolish pick. There's lots of examples where the points he put up were the ones that won games, or kept them in it.

He's very consistent AND a cannon leg. Pretty unusual.


Compare that with JaWalrus or any other first round busts as of late and your argument loses some steam.  Ask Rolando McClain, or Heyward-Bey, or McFadden (isn't he on IR again?) or Gallery, or....
 
2014-08-02 07:15:34 PM  

xaks: I would disagree with your assertion that it was a foolish pick. There's lots of examples where the points he put up were the ones that won games, or kept them in it.


Like every kicker in the NFL.

He's very consistent AND a cannon leg. Pretty unusual.

Except that all NFL kickers are consistent, have big legs and are extremely usual. Name a bad kicker in today's NFL that's still on the team.

Compare that with JaWalrus or any other first round busts as of late and your argument loses some steam.  Ask Rolando McClain, or Heyward-Bey, or McFadden (isn't he on IR again?) or Gallery, or....

Oakland's 'brain' trust over the last two decades have made bad choices, no argument there. And there's opportunity costs to bad choices.  Consider that Oakland in 2000 could have had Shaun Alexander instead of Seabass.
 
2014-08-02 07:21:20 PM  
I wonder how modern sports journalists would cover a good college player that didn't pan out in the NFL (like a Tebow or Manziel of the 1970s)? Picture how they would cover Archie Griffin (great college player but not so great in the NFL) or someone similar
 
2014-08-02 08:04:24 PM  

Wadded Beef: xaks: I would disagree with your assertion that it was a foolish pick. There's lots of examples where the points he put up were the ones that won games, or kept them in it.

Like every kicker in the NFL.

He's very consistent AND a cannon leg. Pretty unusual.

Except that all NFL kickers are consistent, have big legs and are extremely usual. Name a bad kicker in today's NFL that's still on the team.

Compare that with JaWalrus or any other first round busts as of late and your argument loses some steam.  Ask Rolando McClain, or Heyward-Bey, or McFadden (isn't he on IR again?) or Gallery, or....

Oakland's 'brain' trust over the last two decades have made bad choices, no argument there. And there's opportunity costs to bad choices.  Consider that Oakland in 2000 could have had Shaun Alexander instead of Seabass.


Billy Cundiff comes to mind.

There's plenty of kickers that don't have terribly strong legs. Most don't, actually. Accuracy is valued over all, and many don't bulk up much because of it. Seabass is as accurate as all but and handful AND a monster leg. He routinely makes 70 yarders in practice.

Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk.

PROTIP: It's a small number. Like, there really aren't any others.
 
2014-08-02 08:11:27 PM  

xaks: Wadded Beef: xaks: I would disagree with your assertion that it was a foolish pick. There's lots of examples where the points he put up were the ones that won games, or kept them in it.

Like every kicker in the NFL.

He's very consistent AND a cannon leg. Pretty unusual.

Except that all NFL kickers are consistent, have big legs and are extremely usual. Name a bad kicker in today's NFL that's still on the team.

Compare that with JaWalrus or any other first round busts as of late and your argument loses some steam.  Ask Rolando McClain, or Heyward-Bey, or McFadden (isn't he on IR again?) or Gallery, or....

Oakland's 'brain' trust over the last two decades have made bad choices, no argument there. And there's opportunity costs to bad choices.  Consider that Oakland in 2000 could have had Shaun Alexander instead of Seabass.

Billy Cundiff comes to mind.

There's plenty of kickers that don't have terribly strong legs. Most don't, actually. Accuracy is valued over all, and many don't bulk up much because of it. Seabass is as accurate as all but and handful AND a monster leg. He routinely makes 70 yarders in practice.

Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk.

PROTIP: It's a small number. Like, there really aren't any others.


I'll just leave this here (drops mic).
 
2014-08-02 08:23:41 PM  

Wadded Beef: xaks: Wadded Beef: xaks: I would disagree with your assertion that it was a foolish pick. There's lots of examples where the points he put up were the ones that won games, or kept them in it.

Like every kicker in the NFL.

He's very consistent AND a cannon leg. Pretty unusual.

Except that all NFL kickers are consistent, have big legs and are extremely usual. Name a bad kicker in today's NFL that's still on the team.

Compare that with JaWalrus or any other first round busts as of late and your argument loses some steam.  Ask Rolando McClain, or Heyward-Bey, or McFadden (isn't he on IR again?) or Gallery, or....

Oakland's 'brain' trust over the last two decades have made bad choices, no argument there. And there's opportunity costs to bad choices.  Consider that Oakland in 2000 could have had Shaun Alexander instead of Seabass.

Billy Cundiff comes to mind.

There's plenty of kickers that don't have terribly strong legs. Most don't, actually. Accuracy is valued over all, and many don't bulk up much because of it. Seabass is as accurate as all but and handful AND a monster leg. He routinely makes 70 yarders in practice.

Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk.

PROTIP: It's a small number. Like, there really aren't any others.

I'll just leave this here (drops mic).


Uhm, what exactly is that supposed to mean? Oh noes, arguably the biggest leg in placekicking history is only the 42nd most accurate placekicker in the history of the game?

Uhm, yea, you....uh, sure showed us. Or something.
 
2014-08-02 08:32:00 PM  
"That Joe Montana ain't worth the Charmin Extra White he wipes his backside with..."

91.207.61.14
 
2014-08-02 08:46:32 PM  

xaks: Wadded Beef: xaks: Wadded Beef: xaks: I would disagree with your assertion that it was a foolish pick. There's lots of examples where the points he put up were the ones that won games, or kept them in it.

Like every kicker in the NFL.

He's very consistent AND a cannon leg. Pretty unusual.

Except that all NFL kickers are consistent, have big legs and are extremely usual. Name a bad kicker in today's NFL that's still on the team.

Compare that with JaWalrus or any other first round busts as of late and your argument loses some steam.  Ask Rolando McClain, or Heyward-Bey, or McFadden (isn't he on IR again?) or Gallery, or....

Oakland's 'brain' trust over the last two decades have made bad choices, no argument there. And there's opportunity costs to bad choices.  Consider that Oakland in 2000 could have had Shaun Alexander instead of Seabass.

Billy Cundiff comes to mind.

There's plenty of kickers that don't have terribly strong legs. Most don't, actually. Accuracy is valued over all, and many don't bulk up much because of it. Seabass is as accurate as all but and handful AND a monster leg. He routinely makes 70 yarders in practice.

Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk.

PROTIP: It's a small number. Like, there really aren't any others.

I'll just leave this here (drops mic).

Uhm, what exactly is that supposed to mean?


Your words: "Accuracy is valued over all."

Oh noes, arguably the biggest leg in placekicking history is only the 42nd most accurate placekicker in the history of the game?


PROTIP: "Biggest leg in placekicking history" is subjective. Especially when a more accurate kicker in David Akers has a 63-yard FG as well as a more accurate Jason Elam. Not to mention a better kicker in Matt Prater owning the current record. No one cares what somebody told you Janikowski does in practice.  Pretty much every NFL team has the kicker that goes long in practice.

Remember, the debate isn't if Janikowski is a bad kicker, but that it was dumb to draft him #1. The Raiders could have drafted a more influential talent at #17 in 2000.  They could have grabbed Seabass in a later round and, if that didn't work out, they could have drafted a more accurate career kicker in Rian Lindell.

Uhm, yea, you....uh, sure showed us. Or something.

"Us?"

Anyway, it's not a huge secret as to why the Raiders have been irrelevant for over a decade.
 
2014-08-02 08:59:45 PM  

xaks: Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk


Well, kicking 70-yarders in practice sure is a valuable skill.

It's about as valuable as having the ability to throw the ball 200 yards - that is, completely worthless because you'll never do it in a game.
 
2014-08-02 09:06:17 PM  

worlddan: [imgs.xkcd.com image 258x344]


This is rich coming from someone who participates in a glorified storytelling club with dice.

/Really, I can't stand the geek "sportball" narrative.
 
2014-08-02 09:51:19 PM  

IAmRight: xaks: Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk

Well, kicking 70-yarders in practice sure is a valuable skill.

It's about as valuable as having the ability to throw the ball 200 yards - that is, completely worthless because you'll never do it in a game.


And, while we're at it...who bragged in pressers that thier #1 overall draft pick QB could throw the ball through the uprights from midfield on his knees?

Yep, Zombie Al with JaWalrus.

Wadded Beef: Your words: "Accuracy is valued over all."


Yep. And as big as his leg is, he's number 42 in the history of the game? And this is *bad* to you?

I'm done. Its pretty clear I can't compete with the narrative in your head vs. reality. Have fun.
 
2014-08-02 10:04:32 PM  

xaks: IAmRight: xaks: Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk

Well, kicking 70-yarders in practice sure is a valuable skill.

It's about as valuable as having the ability to throw the ball 200 yards - that is, completely worthless because you'll never do it in a game.

And, while we're at it...who bragged in pressers that thier #1 overall draft pick QB could throw the ball through the uprights from midfield on his knees?

Yep, Zombie Al with JaWalrus.

Wadded Beef: Your words: "Accuracy is valued over all."

Yep. And as big as his leg is, he's number 42 in the history of the game? And this is *bad* to you?


Reading comprehension: "the debate isn't if Janikowski is a bad kicker, but that it was dumb to draft him #1. " From my post.

I'm done.

Pretty evident for a while now.

Its pretty clear I can't compete with the narrative in your head vs. reality. Have fun.

Reality: he's a career 79% kicker. Not horrible but unworthy of the number 1 pick.  There are literally dozens of better kickers than Janikowski, most of them active.  I guess this qualifies as a "narrative."
 
2014-08-03 12:35:48 PM  
I actually don't mind the Janikowski pick in the first.  Of the 20 players picked after him, only three went on to have significant NFL careers.  That was one weak draft class.

Oakland apparently picked a WR by the name of Jerry Porter in the 2nd round that year (2000).  If they had decided to go WR that year in the 1st round instead, they would have had the chance to draft such highly-touted WRs as Sylvester Morris, R. Jay Soward, Dennis Northcutt, or Todd Pinkston, all first round/high second round picks that went to other teams.

They used their first round pick to grab a 14-year starter.  Regardless of position, that is a draft pick that paid off.  If they had followed team need conventional wisdom ... they would probably been able to draft Janikowski in the 2nd round after drafting a bust WR in the first.  Eh, it worked out.

/not a Raiders fan, but I like it when conventional wisdom is challenged.  Shakes shiat up.
 
2014-08-03 01:12:09 PM  

Wadded Beef: Remember, the debate isn't if Janikowski is a bad kicker, but that it was dumb to draft him #1.


He should have been deported before he ever kicked a football in the NFL. He's a criminal in the grand Raider tradition.
 
2014-08-03 03:10:45 PM  

Brokenseas: /not a Raiders fan, but I like it when conventional wisdom is challenged.  Shakes shiat up.


Sure. It also allows other teams to get more valuable picks. Just like it's usually great when you're playing FFB against someone drafting kickers and defenses highly.
 
2014-08-03 05:54:04 PM  

IAmRight: xaks: Take a wild guess how many kickers could do that regularly, AND have coaches that know they have so much leg, that kicking 70s in practice is almost zero injury risk

Well, kicking 70-yarders in practice sure is a valuable skill.

It's about as valuable as having the ability to throw the ball 200 yards - that is, completely worthless because you'll never do it in a game.


Seabass was asked to attempt a 75 yard field goal back when Lane Kiffen was trying to get fired.  IIRC, it had the distance but the kick was wide.

IlGreven: worlddan: [imgs.xkcd.com image 258x344]

This is rich coming from someone who participates in a glorified storytelling club with dice.

/Really, I can't stand the geek "sportball" narrative.


I think he acknowledges that in the alt text for the comic.
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and 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