Divisional Round - Vikings @ Niners Support Group

[xxsneakypxx]

Hey guys, 49ers fan here, I come in peace. Just wanted to give a few thoughts on the game.

I'll start by saying of the teams left in the NFC, the Vikings worried me the most, thats not to say we will beat the Packers next week, any given Sunday and all, but I think the Vikings have a better combo of talent/matchup advantage than the Packers(not as good of a matchup) or Seahawks(less talent).

I have a lot of respect for ya'll, as someone who frequently visits other boards to read game threads, ya'll are about as classy as I have seen. I have a few Vikings friends as well, and while one of them talks a ton of trash, right after they lost he said GG to me. Don't see stuff like that often anymore and its great to see.

On to the thread, I saw a lot of people talking about how the Niners lost to the Falcons, which I get, but saying it doesn't provide context. The 49ers were missing 6 of their 11 day one starters on defense in that game. Sherman, Tartt, K'Wuan, Kwon, Jones, and Ford were all out for that game. When missing half of your defense, its going to be tough to beat any team. Against the Vikings, we had all but Jones back. Through this season, the 49ers defense has been absolutely elite when Ford and Tartt are playing(Kwon too, but thats a smaller sample size), when those two were injured, our defense was horrible. Its easy to point to the end of the season and think our defense was bad, but the reality is those guys are huge for us. When Ford is out there, teams can't double Bosa, then it becomes a pick your poison thing, and Tartt's backup Marcel Harris was simply abused by opposing QBs game in and game out(words can't describe how bad he was). Obviously playing top offenses hurt our defensive numbers as well, but missing those players played a huge factor in our struggles down the stretch, and even then we were able to pull off victories against some very good teams, even if it wasn't pretty.

I do like this Vikings team though, ya'll have a lot of good talent and likable players. If the 49ers lost, the Vikings would have been my team the rest of the way. I agree that the play calling was pretty bad for a playoff game, but it seems like you dodged a bullet with your OC heading to Cleveland. I am a big Zimmer fan though, and while I don't believe Cousins is great, I do think he is good enough to get things done with better protection.

We both have pretty young teams, so I expect we are likely to have some more matchups in the future. Hope ya'll have a great offseason(not too great, but you know), and a healthy year next season! Best of luck! :-)

[xxsneakypxx]

Jan 12, 2020 3:27:16 GMT -6 Reignman said:

Jan 12, 2020 1:29:48 GMT -6 @aussie61 said:

I tried to tell people all week SF were legit,but on no,all this delusional upbeat talk about how we match up well (we didn't),they struggled down the stretch (they didn't).
The worst thing you can do is underestimate and disrespect your opponent,and that's what a lot of people did.
SF were missing a lot of starters down the stretch and still got things done,they played Seahawks,Saints,Ravens,Falcons,Packers,Rams and went 4-2, today with all there guys back they did what playoff caliber teams do.They took care of business!

I completely agree, but it doesn't explain why we, a playoff caliber team with Super Bowl aspirations, gave them their most dominating win like we're just another 2-14 lotto team xD. Atlanta figured out how to beat them in San Fran just a few weeks ago. We beat Atlanta 35-0 (Zim mode made it 28-12). We can't even use injuries as an excuse.

I mentioned this in my post above, but again, the 49ers were without 6 of their 11 defensive starters in that game. We were only missing one in this game. We essentially added 5 great starters to this defense from that Falcons game. Its just completely different. 

[Funkytown]

He did these all messed up, but... here is some stuff.

[Reignman]

Jan 13, 2020 17:23:15 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

Jan 12, 2020 3:27:16 GMT -6 Reignman said:

I completely agree, but it doesn't explain why we, a playoff caliber team with Super Bowl aspirations, gave them their most dominating win like we're just another 2-14 lotto team xD. Atlanta figured out how to beat them in San Fran just a few weeks ago. We beat Atlanta 35-0 (Zim mode made it 28-12). We can't even use injuries as an excuse.

I mentioned this in my post above, but again, the 49ers were without 6 of their 11 defensive starters in that game. We were only missing one in this game. We essentially added 5 great starters to this defense from that Falcons game. Its just completely different. 

Maybe so, but that only explains why you won, it doesn't explain why we only had 4 first downs and 80 total yards until garbage time. Your defense is good, but it's not the '85 Bears for crying out loud lol. You had all 11 starters for other games and never shut opponents down this badly before.

I don't want to ruin any illusions you might be carrying of your defense actually being that dominating, but part of the equation was the Vikings offense once again failed to show up as it tends to do in big games. We had a similar game against Green Bay just a few weeks ago on Monday night with the division on the line. 7 first downs the entire game, 150 total yards, a complete no-show. Stefanski probably had his mind on what he was going to do for the Browns as he called the same 4 useless plays over and over again. Those 4 plays being, 1 yard Cook run up the middle on 1st down, 1 yard screen to Cook on 2nd down, and then a sack or a Cousins pass into the 5th row on 3rd down.

[xxsneakypxx]

Jan 13, 2020 18:47:43 GMT -6 Reignman said:

Jan 13, 2020 17:23:15 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

I mentioned this in my post above, but again, the 49ers were without 6 of their 11 defensive starters in that game. We were only missing one in this game. We essentially added 5 great starters to this defense from that Falcons game. Its just completely different. 

Maybe so, but that only explains why you won, it doesn't explain why we only had 4 first downs and 80 total yards until garbage time. Your defense is good, but it's not the '85 Bears for crying out loud lol. You had all 11 starters for other games and never shut opponents down this badly before.

I don't want to ruin any illusions you might be carrying of your defense actually being that dominating, but part of the equation was the Vikings offense once again failed to show up as it tends to do in big games. We had a similar game against Green Bay just a few weeks ago on Monday night with the division on the line. 7 first downs the entire game, 150 total yards, a complete no-show. Stefanski probably had his mind on what he was going to do for the Browns as he called the same 4 useless plays over and over again. Those 4 plays being, 1 yard Cook run up the middle on 1st down, 1 yard screen to Cook on 2nd down, and then a sack or a Cousins pass into the 5th row on 3rd down.

Right, I was moreso responding to "The Falcons figured out how to beat them", which doesn't tell the whole story. They beat a team without Sherman, Tartt, Ford, Kwon, and K'Wuan, which is a lot different than the team you played.

I'm by no means saying the 49ers have an All-Time defense, but I do believe an argument could at least be made that we have the best defense in the NFL right now. Prior to the injuries, we were leading in quite a few defensive categories...of course, we weren't playing world beater offenses at that point either, so I can understand the argument against it as well, but the 49ers don't just have an average defense. The Vikings play calling was pretty bad and absolutely played a factor as well, I agree, I don't think it was solely the 49ers defense shutting them down. I think the 49ers game planned to get the Vikings out of their comfort zone, and Stefanski struggled to adjust. The OL didn't do ya'll any favors either, which ultimately was the biggest reason. 

I still think the Vikings have a bright future though, as I said, I expect we'll be seeing each other again in upcoming seasons. 

[Reignman]

Jan 13, 2020 19:07:32 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

Jan 13, 2020 18:47:43 GMT -6 Reignman said:

Maybe so, but that only explains why you won, it doesn't explain why we only had 4 first downs and 80 total yards until garbage time. Your defense is good, but it's not the '85 Bears for crying out loud lol. You had all 11 starters for other games and never shut opponents down this badly before.

I don't want to ruin any illusions you might be carrying of your defense actually being that dominating, but part of the equation was the Vikings offense once again failed to show up as it tends to do in big games. We had a similar game against Green Bay just a few weeks ago on Monday night with the division on the line. 7 first downs the entire game, 150 total yards, a complete no-show. Stefanski probably had his mind on what he was going to do for the Browns as he called the same 4 useless plays over and over again. Those 4 plays being, 1 yard Cook run up the middle on 1st down, 1 yard screen to Cook on 2nd down, and then a sack or a Cousins pass into the 5th row on 3rd down.

Right, I was moreso responding to "The Falcons figured out how to beat them", which doesn't tell the whole story. They beat a team without Sherman, Tartt, Ford, Kwon, and K'Wuan, which is a lot different than the team you played.

I'm by no means saying the 49ers have an All-Time defense, but I do believe an argument could at least be made that we have the best defense in the NFL right now. Prior to the injuries, we were leading in quite a few defensive categories...of course, we weren't playing world beater offenses at that point either, so I can understand the argument against it as well, but the 49ers don't just have an average defense. The Vikings play calling was pretty bad and absolutely played a factor as well, I agree, I don't think it was solely the 49ers defense shutting them down. I think the 49ers game planned to get the Vikings out of their comfort zone, and Stefanski struggled to adjust. The OL didn't do ya'll any favors either, which ultimately was the biggest reason. 

I still think the Vikings have a bright future though, as I said, I expect we'll be seeing each other again in upcoming seasons. 

Well as long as that defense now shows up and destroys our bitter rivals next week, it's all good. If you mother effers sh*t the bed in this game I'm going to raise hell lol. This is the sole reason why I wanted the 49ers to beat the Seahawks week 17 and secure HFA because I knew it was going to come down to who could beat the Packers.

I certainly knew the Vikings weren't going to go far, so the Packers were the next priority. Most Vikings fans wanted the Seahawks to win just because they wanted the Vikings to have an easier wildcard game, naively believing they had any shot at making it to the Super Bowl. Zimmer has only won 33% of his games against teams above .500, so no way he was suddenly going to win 3 or 4 in a row on the road. That's delusional.

I'm sure they're now thankful I ended up being right, or the NFCCG would be in Lambeau next week just like I predicted lol. So don't you dare lose to the worst most boring 13-3 team in NFL history. I want my 49ers/Chiefs Super Bowl.

[xxsneakypxx]

Jan 13, 2020 19:37:24 GMT -6 Reignman said:

Jan 13, 2020 19:07:32 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

Right, I was moreso responding to "The Falcons figured out how to beat them", which doesn't tell the whole story. They beat a team without Sherman, Tartt, Ford, Kwon, and K'Wuan, which is a lot different than the team you played.

I'm by no means saying the 49ers have an All-Time defense, but I do believe an argument could at least be made that we have the best defense in the NFL right now. Prior to the injuries, we were leading in quite a few defensive categories...of course, we weren't playing world beater offenses at that point either, so I can understand the argument against it as well, but the 49ers don't just have an average defense. The Vikings play calling was pretty bad and absolutely played a factor as well, I agree, I don't think it was solely the 49ers defense shutting them down. I think the 49ers game planned to get the Vikings out of their comfort zone, and Stefanski struggled to adjust. The OL didn't do ya'll any favors either, which ultimately was the biggest reason. 

I still think the Vikings have a bright future though, as I said, I expect we'll be seeing each other again in upcoming seasons. 

Well as long as that defense now shows up and destroys our bitter rivals next week, it's all good. If you mother effers sh*t the bed in this game I'm going to raise hell lol. This is the sole reason why I wanted the 49ers to beat the Seahawks week 17 and secure HFA because I knew it was going to come down to who could beat the Packers.

I certainly knew the Vikings weren't going to go far, so the Packers were the next priority. Most Vikings fans wanted the Seahawks to win just because they wanted the Vikings to have an easier wildcard game, naively believing they had any shot at making it to the Super Bowl. Zimmer has only won 33% of his games against teams above .500, so no way he was suddenly going to win 3 or 4 in a row on the road. That's delusional.

I'm sure they're now thankful I ended up being right, or the NFCCG would be in Lambeau next week just like I predicted lol. So don't you dare lose to the worst most boring 13-3 team in NFL history. I want my 49ers/Chiefs Super Bowl.

I feel better about playing the Packers than I did about playing the Vikings. I feel like we match up fairly well against them, but honestly, sometimes that doesn't matter when playing a QB like Rodgers. The 49ers are going to have to bring it. Luckily, despite not having a ton of playoff experience, we have some incredible leaders in the locker room, so I think we'll be ready. Just got to hope Rodgers doesn't have one of his ridiculous games. 

[TAFKASP]

Jan 13, 2020 17:01:26 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

I'll start by saying of the teams left in the NFC, the Vikings worried me the most

That's only because you clearly haven't watched the Vikings against a good D-Line, if you had you're only worry would have been your team coming out flat.

Jan 13, 2020 17:01:26 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

I have a lot of respect for ya'll, as someone who frequently visits other boards to read game threads, ya'll are about as classy as I have seen.

Don't let spence fool ya, we're a bunch of a$$holes around here!

Jan 13, 2020 17:01:26 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

I do like this Vikings team though, ya'll have a lot of good talent and likable players. If the 49ers lost, the Vikings would have been my team the rest of the way.

So you were intent that if the 49ers lost you were not going to follow the team that'd win it all! Nice, you're ready for Viking fandom!!

Jan 13, 2020 17:01:26 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

We both have pretty young teams, so I expect we are likely to have some more matchups in the future.

You have a young team, the Vikings have many key players on the wrong side of the hill. Your 9ers will be on the wrong side of the hill the next time the Vikings fool us all into thinking they're contenders!

Jan 13, 2020 17:01:26 GMT -6 xxsneakypxx said:

Hope ya'll have a great offseason(not too great, but you know), and a healthy year next season! Best of luck! :-)

Great offseasons, now you have found the key to Vikings fan's hearts! Nobody offseasons quite like the Vikings, and not always involving boats!

As for my opinion of your team, I don't really have one. I don't hate them, don't like them, I'm quite indifferent to be honest... except next week you better f*cking win!!! Good luck the rest of the way, anybody but GB can win for all I care!