1. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    06 Dec '13 07:51
    Alex Smith, notorious for his checkdown abilities, on a 4th down and 4 to go from just inside the redzone attempts to throw a pass into the endzone against the Broncos last Sunday. The pass fell incomplete and the Chiefs lost. Ironic, right?
  2. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    07 Dec '13 19:25
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    Alex Smith, notorious for his checkdown abilities, on a 4th down and 4 to go from just inside the redzone attempts to throw a pass into the endzone against the Broncos last Sunday. The pass fell incomplete and the Chiefs lost. Ironic, right?
    I wouldn't call it ironic. That loss was actually one of his better games, but yeah. He IS Captain Checkdown.
  3. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    07 Dec '13 21:50
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    I wouldn't call it ironic. That loss was actually one of his better games, but yeah. He IS Captain Checkdown.
    Well, when you take last Sunday's game and put it in juxtaposition with the week before that where he needed around 15 yards and checked it down only to lose the game then it becomes very ironic. Then, when you realize he's still better than Colin kaepernick it just becomes hilarious.
  4. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    07 Dec '13 22:44
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    Well, when you take last Sunday's game and put it in juxtaposition with the week before that where he needed around 15 yards and checked it down only to lose the game then it becomes very ironic. Then, when you realize he's still better than Colin kaepernick it just becomes hilarious.
    Better than Colin Kaepernick? You are seriously smoking something.

    Smith isn't even better with Kaepernick having a bad year due to key injuries.
  5. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    07 Dec '13 22:59
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    Better than Colin Kaepernick? You are seriously smoking something.

    Smith isn't even better with Kaepernick having a bad year due to key injuries.
    Even with injuries 49ers receiving corp is better than the chiefs. CK7 just sucks... good luck with that 8-5 record. 9-4 will be the colts record... too bad we're in separate conferences.
  6. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    07 Dec '13 23:13
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    Even with injuries 49ers receiving corp is better than the chiefs. CK7 just sucks... good luck with that 8-5 record. 9-4 will be the colts record... too bad we're in separate conferences.
    No, it's really not. They were left with ONE receiving threat (Boldin) who gets double teamed and the rest are (or were) jokes. Kyle Williams? Baldwin (bust trade from KC)? Osgood? Joke, joke and joke.

    Even Vernon Davis was playing hurt or not at all for much of the season.

    Colin Kaepernick is 9th in the league in Yards Per Attempt. This includes his bad games being mixed in and the stat factors incompletions as 0 yards. There are only 8 quarterbacks in the league who average more yards every time they swing their arm. Kaepernick's QBR is #8 in the league.

    Yes, he really sucks.
  7. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    07 Dec '13 23:431 edit
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    No, it's really not. They were left with ONE receiving threat (Boldin) who gets double teamed and the rest are (or were) jokes. Kyle Williams? Baldwin (bust trade from KC)? Osgood? Joke, joke and joke.

    Even Vernon Davis was playing hurt or not at all for much of the season.

    Colin Kaepernick is 9th in the league in Yards Per Attempt. This inc ...[text shortened]... every time they swing their arm. Kaepernick's QBR is #8 in the league.

    Yes, he really sucks.
    It's called watching the games not the stats. Boldin and Davis are that good, kaepernick can't progress through his reads and that's abundantly apparent when you watch him in the pocket. Put those other receivers you listed in Wilson's or Manning's hands and then call them busts if they don't produce.


    Bowe is KCs best receiver and he can't even catch half of the time. 49ers with or without injuries are way more talented on the offensive side of the ball than KC.
  8. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    07 Dec '13 23:551 edit
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    It's called watching the games not the stats. Boldin and Davis are that good, kaepernick can't progress through his reads and that's abundantly apparent when you watch him in the pocket. Put those other receivers you listed in Wilson's or Manning's hands and then call them busts if they don't produce.


    Bowe is KCs best receiver and he can't even ca ...[text shortened]... 49ers with or without injuries are way more talented on the offensive side of the ball than KC.
    I watch every single game. I know, it's crazy for me to bring up stats. I mean, all they do is show with what efficiency and for how many yards Kaepernick gets the ball into the receivers' hands.

    Davis played injured or not at all in at least half of the games. ONE receiving threat is easy for any team to shut down.

    As for the other receivers, forget dropping passes. They can't even get open. You think receivers don't matter? Look how bad Brady and Luck sucked when their key receivers went down.
  9. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    08 Dec '13 00:15
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    I watch every single game. I know, it's crazy for me to bring up stats. I mean, all they do is show with what efficiency Kaepernick and for how many yards Kaepernick gets the ball into the receivers' hands.

    Davis played injured or not at all in at least half of the games. ONE receiving threat is easy for any team to shut down.

    As for the ot ...[text shortened]... k receivers don't matter? Look how bad Brady and Luck sucked when their key receivers went down.
    They get open they just don't get targets.
  10. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    09 Dec '13 00:43
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    Even with injuries 49ers receiving corp is better than the chiefs. CK7 just sucks... good luck with that 8-5 record. 9-4 will be the colts record... too bad we're in separate conferences.
    "too bad we're in separate conferences."

    I agree! See? We don't disagree on everything. We both want the 9-4 49ers to be the same conference as the 8-5 Colts.

    I will even go further than that. I wish the 9-4 49ers were in the 8-5 Colts' division, that way the 9-4 49ers could be DIVISION LEADERS of the AFC South (ya know, because we would have the best record), instead of contending with real teams like the Seahawks and Cardinals being in the same division.

    PS: Good luck with that 8-5 record.
  11. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    09 Dec '13 01:511 edit
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    "too bad we're in separate conferences."

    I agree! See? We don't disagree on everything. We both want the [b]9-4
    49ers to be the same conference as the 8-5 Colts.

    I will even go further than that. I wish the 9-4 49ers were in the 8-5 Colts' division, that way the 9-4 49ers could be DIVISION LEADERS of the AFC ...[text shortened]... eahawks and Cardinals being in the same division.

    PS: Good luck with that 8-5 record.[/b]
    The only calls, for the most part, against the Niners were personal fouls when their line was holding all game long. Wouldn't be a problem if they were consistent yet they were calling ticky tack calls on the seahawks secondary, not all of them but enough to have an impact.

    Then that crabtree fumble. That should have been reviewable, they didn't call him down by forward progress but somehow change the call when Pete throws the red flag? The call may have stood but to not even get a review is ridiculous and you are the biggest Homer in the world if you claim they didn't call him down by contact.

    PS. Colts got manhandled so I admit that but it was frustrating watching the inconsistent calls in this game. 49ers deserve the win, they played well, but the refs were definitely inconsistent in their calling.
  12. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    09 Dec '13 02:26
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    The only calls, for the most part, against the Niners were personal fouls when their line was holding all game long. Wouldn't be a problem if they were consistent yet they were calling ticky tack calls on the seahawks secondary, not all of them but enough to have an impact.

    Then that crabtree fumble. That should have been reviewable, they didn't cal ...[text shortened]... s deserve the win, they played well, but the refs were definitely inconsistent in their calling.
    They should have called more on the Seahawks secondary than they did, including a deep bomb to Crabtree that would have made it 1st & goal.

    You don't know what would have happened if that non-fumble was reviewable. The few replays they did were inconclusive. You do know that multiple refs can end up making different calls, right? One might call down by contact, and another forward progress. His forward progress was clearly stopped, and defenders can't just hold someone up all day so they can keep trying to strip the ball.

    There were plenty of non-personal foul calls against the 49ers, from holding to offsides to false start to illegal hands to the face to pass interference. That's just off the top of my head.
  13. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    09 Dec '13 03:29
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    They should have called more on the Seahawks secondary than they did, including a deep bomb to Crabtree that would have made it 1st & goal.

    You don't know what would have happened if that non-fumble was reviewable. The few replays they did were inconclusive. You do know that multiple refs can end up making different calls, right? One might call ...[text shortened]... lse start to illegal hands to the face to pass interference. That's just off the top of my head.
    His forward progress wasn't stopped, are you serious? He was falling forward and appeared to lose the ball just before he hit the ground, it is ridiculous to call down by forward progress in a situation where the ball carrier is falling to the ground especially when falling forward. I have never seen that called forward progress, I've seen ball carriers get tackled falling backwards to the ground and fumble the ball, so I guess all of those should have never been fumbles because they were down by forward progress?

    To be clear, I am not 100% certain it would have been a fumble although that is what it looked like from the few replays they showed, but that clearly should have been allowed a challenge.
  14. Joined
    10 May '09
    Moves
    13341
    09 Dec '13 23:36
    Originally posted by MISTER CHESS
    His forward progress wasn't stopped, are you serious? He was falling forward and appeared to lose the ball just before he hit the ground, it is ridiculous to call down by forward progress in a situation where the ball carrier is falling to the ground especially when falling forward. I have never seen that called forward progress, I've seen ball carriers ...[text shortened]... ed like from the few replays they showed, but that clearly should have been allowed a challenge.
    So he was falling forward, yet he landed on his butt? He might not be pretty but he doesn't have an A$$ face.

    Also, they replayed two angles. The first one looked to me like his butt hit just before the ball came out. The second one you couldn't tell at all. To turn it over the film has to be conclusive.
  15. Joined
    08 Aug '09
    Moves
    708
    10 Dec '13 02:02
    Originally posted by USArmyParatrooper
    So he was falling forward, yet he landed on his butt? He might not be pretty but he doesn't have an A$$ face.

    Also, they replayed two angles. The first one looked to me like his butt hit just before the ball came out. The second one you couldn't tell at all. To turn it over the film has to be conclusive.
    Falling forward as in towards the endzone. You knew that.

    You're incorrigible, the ball came out first.
Back to Top