~~POWER RANKINGS~~

[fishgutmartyr]

I don't know if any of you guys have noticed, but there have been precious few defenses on any team that have been able to stop anything...

 

For the 49'ers, it's important to stop the run because you want Alex Smith to be the guy that has to beat you; but with a lot of other games, I'd rather see a team take 3-4-5 yards at a time by running rather than 10-20 yards passing. There's a higher likelihood of a long rushing drive like that stalling, and when they do decide to pass, the odds are in your favor for a sack or INT. If you have a fast-scoring offense, you can compensate for the loss in time of possession.

 

Think about it: McCoy's success, for example, takes the ball out of the hands of Jackson, Avant, Maclin, and Celek. Of course, you can't let them run free and have to cover them, but they aren't catching 40+ yard passes on you, either. I'm ok with that. If you stop McCoy on second down, contain and pressure Vick, the turnovers come on 3rd down. Let him have as many 5 yard first downs as he'd like.

 

Our big problem is we give away too many 10-20 yard runs.

 

Meanwhile, if an offense is allowed to get pass-heavy, you can get flagged for roughing the passer, interference, even hitting a defenseless player; or maybe the guy even catches it. That's four opportunities to advance the ball somehow on every play; three of which don't even need a completion. The worst that can happen is a sack or an INT, but passing on a down other than 3rd decreases the chance of a sack, and therefore the INT rate lowers due to less pressure. The odds are in the offense's favor.

 

Conversely, a run can be a small gain, a large gain, a loss, no gain, or a fumble. Four of those options are in the defense's favor: three of them are clearly so.

 

Ideally, you want to stop everything; but if you can't, let them run enough where they aren't killing you with the pass. See SB XXV.

 

That in no way should be construed as me saying this defense is playing very well at all, let alone claiming to be one of the best in the league. I just don't think the emphasis on stopping the run should be as great as some people think. Not at this point in NFL history, anyway.

[BadEgg]

well nas, this may not be the best time for the dog to state that the 49ers are not as good as the 7-1 record sounds. so yes, the dog frankly believes that the giants are going to win this game. call it downplaying if you want, but the league is in an odd place were there is no clear cut upper tier of teams....and quite frankly, if you feel that 6-2 given the schedule is elite, than good for you.

 

I agree here Dog. The Giants should win this game. Let's not forget that the Cowboys beat them with a QB that had 1 working lung and a WR named Jessie Holley.

[RandolphScott]

I agree here Dog. The Giants should win this game. Let's not forget that the Cowboys beat them with a QB that had 1 working lung and a WR named Jessie Holley.

 

And lost to the Patriots, while the Giants didn't have there number 1 receiver, number 1 running back and starting center.

 

Goes both ways, dick.

[ksm7]

First, doesn't matter how much another team runs the ball it's important to stop them when they do. I couldn't care less where they are ranked in rushing attempts per game. That is a completely useless statistic, but of course that doesn't stop the Dog. I do know the Pats ran the ball 23 times (not counting the Brady scramble), and the Giants did a pretty good job overall on those runs, that is the point.

 

But I love how the Dog is discounting the 49ers already, as if they haven't beaten anyone. We are more than capable of losing to this team and they are the real deal. The 49ers will probably be the toughest opponent we have played to date. This is a team that has already beaten the Bengals, the Lions, the Eagles, and completely DESTROYED the Buccaneers. That's 4 quality wins, and that is a team that plays tremendous defense, with 2 of the best linebackers in the NFL and one of the best DE's. Plus they can run the ball and now have weapons, and the Giants have to travel across the country and play in their house.

 

This is a game that if we win, it will be a dog fight, and it will be a high quality win. I'm not saying that SF is the Packers or they are Super Bowl bound, but any time you have a team that can run the ball well and plays great defense, it's a formula for a tough team to beat.

 

it does matter if you are going to highlight a team's defensive improvement when stopping the run if they are playing a team that doesn't run the ball or prefer to run the ball. the dog wonders, will you highlight how effective the giant's defense stops the pass this week, even though the 49ers don't like to throw and have thrown for less passing yards than 29 other teams? do you just choose to try and bend statistics and numbers to work only in your way? and the dog isn't discounting the 49ers - the dog just doesn't believe they are as good as the 7-1 record would indicate. they are certainly a decent team, but not that good. the dog assumes this will come out in the wash as time goes on...you'll see. the dog is confident you will get there eventually "allstar"jim....

[Allstarjim]

And, as I noted, they ran the ball 23 times in that specific game, 'lil dog. And the Giants did a pretty good job. It's not relevant what they have done in past games. As I said, what's relevant to my point was that specific game... you're the one throwing out statistics to try and bend and twist the argument. You're a joke, dude.

 

And yes, I would say the Giants defensed the pass well if they play good pass defense against the 49ers. Say the 49ers pass the ball 30+ times... if we play well, it won't matter that the 49ers averaged 20 pass plays per game in games prior. Irrelevant. I think the point you are attempting to make is that the area is not a strength of the team. To which I'd say they are all talented players, they are professionals in the NFL, and if you stink, they will expose you. We stunk in run defense early in the season, I for one have seen a great improvement. But you'll see on Sunday. Gore might get his 100, but he's not going to get 130 or 150. They will limit him. In fact, I'll say it right now I'm betting he won't get 100.

[BadEgg]

And lost to the Patriots, while the Giants didn't have there number 1 receiver, number 1 running back and starting center.

 

Goes both ways, dick.

 

Calm down, I was not trying to make a broad statement about anything, or make any comparisons what so ever to the Pats or anyother team.

 

I was just attempting to point out that it is not necessary to go back in time and kidnap Joe Montana in the prime of his career to thwart this ever indimidating and seemingly unstoppable 49ers team.

 

Get a guy with 2 healthy lungs, a live arm, and fire away...

[BIGBLUE01]

I agree here Dog. The Giants should win this game. Let's not forget that the Cowboys beat them with a QB that had 1 working lung and a WR named Jessie Holley.

 

Do you agree with the dog, because he too is trying to break down each team before the Giants play them and make us realize they really arent that good so if we win, its no biggie? Even if said teams have the best QB in football for the last 7 years and a 7-1 team with a great RB and LB?

 

Im sorry you couldnt beat.....errr.....I mean, even resemble a football team against Philly, a team we beat decisively. Dont let that hurt cloud your thinking process.

[ksm7]

And, as I noted, they ran the ball 23 times in that specific game, 'lil dog. And the Giants did a pretty good job. It's not relevant what they have done in past games. As I said, what's relevant to my point was that specific game... you're the one throwing out statistics to try and bend and twist the argument. You're a joke, dude.

 

And yes, I would say the Giants defensed the pass well if they play good pass defense against the 49ers. Say the 49ers pass the ball 30+ times... if we play well, it won't matter that the 49ers averaged 20 pass plays per game in games prior. Irrelevant. I think the point you are attempting to make is that the area is not a strength of the team. To which I'd say they are all talented players, they are professionals in the NFL, and if you stink, they will expose you. We stunk in run defense early in the season, I for one have seen a great improvement. But you'll see on Sunday. Gore might get his 100, but he's not going to get 130 or 150. They will limit him. In fact, I'll say it right now I'm betting he won't get 100.

 

if it is not the strength or desire of a team to run the ball, the dog's point dolt is that you can't sit there and highlight the "improved" giants run defense when that is the team they are playing...boy, maybe you need blgblue to explain it to you, which would be a first. your other point about them all being professionals is as silly as ever - your not going to expose a weakness if in order to do so you are utilizing an aspect of the game that you yourself are not good at. if the giants pass defense was putrid, the dog is pretty sure the 49ers wouldn't plan on giving the ball to Gore 7 times all game and marching the vaunted Alex Smith out to throw 35 times to exploit it...you seem to know less and less the more you type...the dog loves it.