The biggest reason SF is in XLVII

Feb 1, 2013 Full story: Fox Sports 88

Alex Marvez is a Senior NFL Writer for FOXSports.com. He has covered the NFL for the past 17 seasons as a beat writer and is the former president of the Pro Football Writers of America.

Full Story
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#27 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
They did run James on first down on the final drive. Why can't I mention that play??? There is no reason not to mention that play. Also when the ravens were taking the safety there was the most blatant hold right in front of the ref that was not called. That was the most egregious no call.
And they had 3 MORE attempts to run the ball into the end zone, and 2 TIMEOUTS left. Look up the rules of NFL football. It allows for bumping and shoving for the first 5 yards, The_Solution!

If you are also going to complain about a hold, in front of the ref, on a safety that was conceded by the Ravens, of which likely would have either wound up having the Ravens get the ball back AGAIN, at half the distance they were at before they conceded the safety, which would allow them to do the SAME thing the next play, or for the penalty to be assessed on the safety punt, which, let's say it backs up Baltimore's safety kick back 10 yards, with just 4 seconds left in the game, you tell me how that makes a difference, The_Solution...it doesn't make a difference to me.

What WOULD have made a difference is if the San Francisco 49ers RAN THE BALL 4 TIMES into that end zone, with such a small amount of time left for Baltimore to try to come back and either score the tying or WINNING field goal, with maybe 20 seconds left, by the time they got the ball back. The FACT that San Francisco DIDN'T do that, is on them, and them only...not the referees!

Just deal with THAT fact!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#28 Feb 4, 2013
eric wrote:
1st and goal at Baltimore's 5,4 downs and ZERO points and never ran! the thing that got them there.
Then again..
if the refs called that P.I on SF the last game vs ATL. ATL would have had a 1st and goal at SF 6,,1Minute left.
Interesting concept...guess The_Solution can't argue that...
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#29 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound like a jack ass. You can JAM but you can't HOLD. The hold was in the end zone so that shows ANY contact at that point would be illegal. If you knew how to read you would know I said the refs were not the only reason they lost. I think the defense is fine besides the corner positron and depth at d line and outside line backer. Akers has to go but there was no better option during the playoffs(billy Cundiff is just as bad). The safeties are amazing. They had a few bad plays in the game though. Moss was very average at best. He won't be missed at all if we don't choose to pick up the option on him next year. Manningham
And Kyle Williams back from injury will help a lot.
Look at the hold AGAIN...I did for quite a while. I am a Kaepernick fan as much as any other San Francisco fan, though I can't say that I agree that IF the call for pass interference was made against Baltimore on that play, that San Francisco WOULD have scored a touchdown, as they didn't even advance the ball an inch in their previous 3 downs!

When it comes to 'holding', a defensive player, as well as an offensive player, can grab and block within the body area, while it is within a 5 yard distance of the line of scrimmage, from what I understand of the NFL rules. I don't like it one bit, though I guess it comes down to letting the receivers and the cornerbacks bump and run with each other, and jostle for position. This is what the commish considers 'letting the players play'. I would rather see less of the grabbing, and more of the helmet on helmet hits, on receivers that have caught the ball, AND taken two steps with the ball. Basically, that hit that Ray Lewis laid on that New England Patriots' receiver, where he was flagged for 15 yards, was BULLSHIT, especially when Dennis Pitta was hit by a New England player, of which was a BLATANT helmet to helmet hit, and NO penalty was called.

Look...I can agree with you about a missed call, I can be indifferent to the missed call, The_Solution...it STILL doesn't matter to me, where it comes to San Francisco botching offensive play calls, of which could have had their team take their first lead in the game!

Where it comes to Akers, a rookie field goal kicker could have done better than missing 14 FIELD GOALS in a season, The_Solution...this is DEFINITELY a fact that you would have to agree with. Akers should have been gone at the MIDDLE of San Francisco's season! No matter if you agree or not, San Francisco needs to reconstruct their back seven defensive players. A couple of safeties (a budding star safety, and maybe a veteran safety...but NOT Charles Woodson, or Champ Bailey), and maybe one budding linebacker or two, and San Francisco will be a team of DESTINY, for YEARS TO COME!

I look forward to next season...Manningham, Kyle Williams and Colin Kaepernick winning a Super Bowl...I can see it now!

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#30 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>And they had 3 MORE attempts to run the ball into the end zone, and 2 TIMEOUTS left. Look up the rules of NFL football. It allows for bumping and shoving for the first 5 yards, The_Solution!

If you are also going to complain about a hold, in front of the ref, on a safety that was conceded by the Ravens, of which likely would have either wound up having the Ravens get the ball back AGAIN, at half the distance they were at before they conceded the safety, which would allow them to do the SAME thing the next play, or for the penalty to be assessed on the safety punt, which, let's say it backs up Baltimore's safety kick back 10 yards, with just 4 seconds left in the game, you tell me how that makes a difference, The_Solution...it doesn't make a difference to me.

What WOULD have made a difference is if the San Francisco 49ers RAN THE BALL 4 TIMES into that end zone, with such a small amount of time left for Baltimore to try to come back and either score the tying or WINNING field goal, with maybe 20 seconds left, by the time they got the ball back. The FACT that San Francisco DIDN'T do that, is on them, and them only...not the referees!

Just deal with THAT fact!
If they assessed it on the kick off at least they would have a chance for a Hail Mary touchdown or pass interference. Lets do some simple math. It they are on the 5 yard line that means the goal line is 5 yards away. So if there is contact in the end zone then it is not legal because it is beyond 5 yards. We all get it bad play calling!! But that does not excuse the refs for blowing the call. Look at the pic!! He had arms wrapped around him which illegal ANYWHERE on the field!

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#31 Feb 4, 2013
eric wrote:
1st and goal at Baltimore's 5,4 downs and ZERO points and never ran! the thing that got them there.
Then again..
if the refs called that P.I on SF the last game vs ATL. ATL would have had a 1st and goal at SF 6,,1Minute left.
If it was p.i against ATL. That WAS within the 5 yard contact zone. And they ran once on first down with James

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#32 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>Look at the hold AGAIN...I did for quite a while. I am a Kaepernick fan as much as any other San Francisco fan, though I can't say that I agree that IF the call for pass interference was made against Baltimore on that play, that San Francisco WOULD have scored a touchdown, as they didn't even advance the ball an inch in their previous 3 downs!

When it comes to 'holding', a defensive player, as well as an offensive player, can grab and block within the body area, while it is within a 5 yard distance of the line of scrimmage, from what I understand of the NFL rules. I don't like it one bit, though I guess it comes down to letting the receivers and the cornerbacks bump and run with each other, and jostle for position. This is what the commish considers 'letting the players play'. I would rather see less of the grabbing, and more of the helmet on helmet hits, on receivers that have caught the ball, AND taken two steps with the ball. Basically, that hit that Ray Lewis laid on that New England Patriots' receiver, where he was flagged for 15 yards, was BULLSHIT, especially when Dennis Pitta was hit by a New England player, of which was a BLATANT helmet to helmet hit, and NO penalty was called.

Look...I can agree with you about a missed call, I can be indifferent to the missed call, The_Solution...it STILL doesn't matter to me, where it comes to San Francisco botching offensive play calls, of which could have had their team take their first lead in the game!

Where it comes to Akers, a rookie field goal kicker could have done better than missing 14 FIELD GOALS in a season, The_Solution...this is DEFINITELY a fact that you would have to agree with. Akers should have been gone at the MIDDLE of San Francisco's season! No matter if you agree or not, San Francisco needs to reconstruct their back seven defensive players. A couple of safeties (a budding star safety, and maybe a veteran safety...but NOT Charles Woodson, or Champ Bailey), and maybe one budding linebacker or two, and San Francisco will be a team of DESTINY, for YEARS TO COME!

I look forward to next season...Manningham, Kyle Williams and Colin Kaepernick winning a Super Bowl...I can see it now!
Which safety or line backers do you think should be gone? Willis and bowman are all pro guys. Aldon smith is great(even though he doesn't do much in the playoffs) safetys goldson and Whitner are pro bowl players who are VERY good in my opinion. With hindsight yeah Akers should have been gone. Since he was so good last year I can understand how harbaugh would think he could get out of the slump. Frankly there were no good free agent kickers around. Medlock and Cundiff are no better. Nate Kaeding was not healthy yet. I'm not sure what better options were available
redrum

Mineville, NY

#33 Feb 4, 2013
The game would have been more intresting if the ref's had shown up, To many bad plays with holding and the ref was 10 feet away, Friggin bling cheats.
eric

Marshfield, WI

#34 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
If it was p.i against ATL. That WAS within the 5 yard contact zone. And they ran once on first down with James
But the ball was in air,so if contact is made before the ball gets there,its Pass Interference no matter how far or short the throw is.
eric

Marshfield, WI

#35 Feb 4, 2013
Officiating sucked all season unf. SO Hopefully they can remedy the situation.
Green Bay got absolutely screwed in Seattle,ATL got a bit screwed vs SF in the NFC title game, there were game after game with questionable calls and for some reason there seemed to be more shitty calls by refs this year then in other years ( possibly because they were watched a whole lot closer because of the replacement refs) but players are faster,quicker,strong and more athletic SO maybe refs need to workout more and gain speed and agility to keep up,maybe the rules need to be more straight forward? who knows
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#36 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
If they assessed it on the kick off at least they would have a chance for a Hail Mary touchdown or pass interference. Lets do some simple math. It they are on the 5 yard line that means the goal line is 5 yards away. So if there is contact in the end zone then it is not legal because it is beyond 5 yards. We all get it bad play calling!! But that does not excuse the refs for blowing the call. Look at the pic!! He had arms wrapped around him which illegal ANYWHERE on the field!
You going to justify San Francisco's loss SOLELY on ONE blown call, this is IF I agree with you (which to a point, I do)?

As I said, IF the call was given to San Francisco, you think that San Francisco would have WON?

Where do you put the 'blown call' in relation to the rest of San Francisco's lacklustre play in the Super Bowl game? Out of the 7 reasons that I have listed where it came down to San Francisco basically GIVING the game to the Baltimore Ravens, list off to me where, between 1-8 that THAT 'blown call' should be placed, The_Solution?

Again, a good point was made by some fan that watched the NFC championship game, when it was Atlanta that was complaining about a pass interference call, that basically sent the San Francisco 49ers to the Super Bowl. Had that call been made, and Atlanta have the ball, with 4 more downs, would Atlanta been the team in the Super Bowl INSTEAD of San Francisco? Answer THAT question for me, BEFORE you decide where you put that 'blown call' by the referees in the Super Bowl, The_Solution...can't wait to hear your excuse on that!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#37 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
If it was p.i against ATL. That WAS within the 5 yard contact zone. And they ran once on first down with James
When the ball is on its way, a defender cannot be draped in contact over the receiver. You can't have it BOTH ways. Your argument doesn't stand up in this case. Either BOTH were blown calls, or you got to throw your hands up in the air and let both of those incidences pass!

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#38 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>When the ball is on its way, a defender cannot be draped in contact over the receiver. You can't have it BOTH ways. Your argument doesn't stand up in this case. Either BOTH were blown calls, or you got to throw your hands up in the air and let both of those incidences pass!
Both players have the right to go for the ball. Bowman was jamming him, then the ball was thrown. It is NOT illegal. If that was illegal then a qb would just throw near a wr every time he was being jammed. Bowman did not hold white. He jammed him then made a play on the ball. In the Super Bowl the cb didn't play the ball at all. He just grabbed on to Crabtree
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#39 Feb 4, 2013
eric wrote:
Officiating sucked all season unf. SO Hopefully they can remedy the situation.
Green Bay got absolutely screwed in Seattle,ATL got a bit screwed vs SF in the NFC title game, there were game after game with questionable calls and for some reason there seemed to be more shitty calls by refs this year then in other years ( possibly because they were watched a whole lot closer because of the replacement refs) but players are faster,quicker,strong and more athletic SO maybe refs need to workout more and gain speed and agility to keep up,maybe the rules need to be more straight forward? who knows
Green Bay almost got screwed in Green Bay against New Orleans...but hey, they pulled that victory out.

The Green Bay situation where they 'supposedly' got screwed in Seattle is actually a call that was interpreted by the replacement referees, that is in the NFL rulebook of dual possession, and the judgement call goes to the offensive team. The Green Bay player could have avoided that whole mess by simply knocking the ball to the ground, but sometimes, somebody has to show you the consequence of trying to play the hero, in a situation where you should just take the smart play, and have the game ended there.

Just ask safety Jim Leonhard...his attempt to play the hero at home actually gave a STUNNED Jacoby Jones, of whom beat #26 Rahim Moore on the sideline pattern, a free pass to the end zone, and wound up having Baltimore win in overtime against the Denver Broncos, simply because Leonhard didn't do what he was SUPPOSED to do, which is DEFLECT the flipping ball...he tried to be the hero, and wound up looking like the goat for doing so!

Story of the Baltimore Ravens' triumph in the playoffs, I guess!

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#40 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>You going to justify San Francisco's loss SOLELY on ONE blown call, this is IF I agree with you (which to a point, I do)?

As I said, IF the call was given to San Francisco, you think that San Francisco would have WON?

Where do you put the 'blown call' in relation to the rest of San Francisco's lacklustre play in the Super Bowl game? Out of the 7 reasons that I have listed where it came down to San Francisco basically GIVING the game to the Baltimore Ravens, list off to me where, between 1-8 that THAT 'blown call' should be placed, The_Solution?

Again, a good point was made by some fan that watched the NFC championship game, when it was Atlanta that was complaining about a pass interference call, that basically sent the San Francisco 49ers to the Super Bowl. Had that call been made, and Atlanta have the ball, with 4 more downs, would Atlanta been the team in the Super Bowl INSTEAD of San Francisco? Answer THAT question for me, BEFORE you decide where you put that 'blown call' by the referees in the Super Bowl, The_Solution...can't wait to hear your excuse on that!
LISTEN HERE THIS IS THE LAST TIME I AM GOING TO SAY THIS!! THE BLOWN CALLS WERE 1 FACTOR OF THE LOSS! NOT THE SOLE FACTOR. DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM READING?

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#41 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>You going to justify San Francisco's loss SOLELY on ONE blown call, this is IF I agree with you (which to a point, I do)?

As I said, IF the call was given to San Francisco, you think that San Francisco would have WON?

Where do you put the 'blown call' in relation to the rest of San Francisco's lacklustre play in the Super Bowl game? Out of the 7 reasons that I have listed where it came down to San Francisco basically GIVING the game to the Baltimore Ravens, list off to me where, between 1-8 that THAT 'blown call' should be placed, The_Solution?

Again, a good point was made by some fan that watched the NFC championship game, when it was Atlanta that was complaining about a pass interference call, that basically sent the San Francisco 49ers to the Super Bowl. Had that call been made, and Atlanta have the ball, with 4 more downs, would Atlanta been the team in the Super Bowl INSTEAD of San Francisco? Answer THAT question for me, BEFORE you decide where you put that 'blown call' by the referees in the Super Bowl, The_Solution...can't wait to hear your excuse on that!

Now, to answer your questions. I do believe SF would have won if they called the 4th and goal penalty. Calling their play lackluster is an overstatement. If ATL got the penalty they very well could have been in the Super Bowl. I honestly don't believe it was a penalty though.
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#42 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Which safety or line backers do you think should be gone? Willis and bowman are all pro guys. Aldon smith is great(even though he doesn't do much in the playoffs) safetys goldson and Whitner are pro bowl players who are VERY good in my opinion. With hindsight yeah Akers should have been gone. Since he was so good last year I can understand how harbaugh would think he could get out of the slump. Frankly there were no good free agent kickers around. Medlock and Cundiff are no better. Nate Kaeding was not healthy yet. I'm not sure what better options were available
San Francisco plays the 4-3? Then maybe their linebackers need to get into better shape, because you can't have 3 GAMES, against explosive offences, and give up so many points, and expect to win each and every one of those games.

As for the safeties, if San Francisco is playing the 4-3, or the 3-4, you STILL have 4 players in the secondary, and even if you have 2 Pro Bowlers back there, you still have either 1 or 2 others that are either not pulling their weight, or should be shipped out. YOU take a look at the team, and as the General Manager of the San Francisco 49ers, you tell me who stays, and who goes in San Francisco's back 7 or 8, alright? Just outline their positions when you show who is staying or who is going, based on either the 3-4 formation or the 4-3 formation.

If you get it right, the San Francisco 49ers franchise owes you a party at your house, and they should bring you on as a scout for their team, and free season tickets for 4 people, as long as you keep San Francisco winning...deal?

;)

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#43 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>When the ball is on its way, a defender cannot be draped in contact over the receiver. You can't have it BOTH ways. Your argument doesn't stand up in this case. Either BOTH were blown calls, or you got to throw your hands up in the air and let both of those incidences pass!
No you don't just throw your hands up. You judge each play on it own content. Those 2 plays were very different. It may not seem that way to a novice. Roddy white was under 5 yards down field. Crabtree was past 5. Bowman was not grabbing. Bal. DB WAS holding. You can't even compare the 2
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#44 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
LISTEN HERE THIS IS THE LAST TIME I AM GOING TO SAY THIS!! THE BLOWN CALLS WERE 1 FACTOR OF THE LOSS! NOT THE SOLE FACTOR. DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM READING?
And the blown calls were ONLY in favour of Baltimore...that is what you want everybody to believe, The_Solution? It is a conspiracy to keep the Super Bowl championship away from San Francisco? It's the New Orleans screw job, much like the Montreal screw job that gave the WWF title to Shawn Michaels over Bret Hart all over again, except with the Vince Lombardi trophy getting snatched from San Francisco, and given to a less deserving team like Baltimore?

GIVE IT A REST, The_Solution! I told you to PLACE this 'blown call' on a priority list of the ones that I listed in a PREVIOUS comment, and tell me where you think that that 'blown call' rates in IMPORTANCE where it came to San Francisco losing. I didn't say that the blown call wasn't A factor...I'm just saying that it was almost a non-factor, as there are MANY OTHER FACTORS that kept San Francisco from winning the Super Bowl, and they only have themselves to blame!
Blacktigershark

Edmonton, Canada

#45 Feb 4, 2013
The_Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Both players have the right to go for the ball. Bowman was jamming him, then the ball was thrown. It is NOT illegal. If that was illegal then a qb would just throw near a wr every time he was being jammed. Bowman did not hold white. He jammed him then made a play on the ball. In the Super Bowl the cb didn't play the ball at all. He just grabbed on to Crabtree
Whatever you say, kid...still doesn't automatically give San Francisco A TOUCHDOWN for a penalty. THAT'S what I'm trying to get through to you. There's no saying that IF the call was made, that San Francisco was going to win that game...but hey...try to say yes, as my next comment is prepared for your ignorant arse!

:D

“Justice always prevails”

Since: Jan 12

vacaville

#46 Feb 4, 2013
Blacktigershark wrote:
<quoted text>San Francisco plays the 4-3? Then maybe their linebackers need to get into better shape, because you can't have 3 GAMES, against explosive offences, and give up so many points, and expect to win each and every one of those games.

As for the safeties, if San Francisco is playing the 4-3, or the 3-4, you STILL have 4 players in the secondary, and even if you have 2 Pro Bowlers back there, you still have either 1 or 2 others that are either not pulling their weight, or should be shipped out. YOU take a look at the team, and as the General Manager of the San Francisco 49ers, you tell me who stays, and who goes in San Francisco's back 7 or 8, alright? Just outline their positions when you show who is staying or who is going, based on either the 3-4 formation or the 4-3 formation.

If you get it right, the San Francisco 49ers franchise owes you a party at your house, and they should bring you on as a scout for their team, and free season tickets for 4 people, as long as you keep San Francisco winning...deal?

;)
SF plays the 3-4. I think the problem is SF keeps their starting 11 on the field even when the offense brings in extra WR's. So they end up with a line backer covering a WR. That also makes the starters way more tired throughout the game. I saw a stat that said SF starting 11 played 90% of all plays this year, which was by far the most in the NFL. So I think they need to use 3 to 4 CB packages a little more. I think the #1Cornerback Rodgers needs to go. I think the #3 cb culliver needs to move to #4 and a new #3 be brought in.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Baltimore Ravens Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ray Rice hopes for 2nd chance in NFL Dec 2 10th Floor Pimp Slap 2
Report: Colts not interested in Ray Rice if he'... Nov 19 Laughing Bear Fan 1
Cary Williams: 'Patriots Are Cheaters' Nov 18 Flatulence Fred 12
Ray Rice And Domestic Violence in the NFL Nov 17 puzzledpete 1
Coffman's cheap shot took out Ravens assistant ... Nov 17 Go Blue Forever 1
Foster focused on making an impact on and off t... Nov '14 Fartimus Gordon 3
Ben Roethlisberger lights up Ravens, records an... Nov '14 Flatulence Fred 2
More from around the web