Well for the second year in a row Patrick Willis is dominating his way in the Madden cover vote. The question I have is, should he have been the 49er to represent the team this year? Now I do not know if the player had to agree to be on the cover or not... but let's just assume that it is open to anyone on the team. The one knock I have on Bam-Bam this year, is that his stats regressed from last year. Here are his 2010 and 2011 stats below:

G GS Comb Total Ast Sck SFTY PDef Int Yds Avg Lng TDs FF
13 13 97 74 23 2.0 -- 12 1 10 10.0 10 0 4
15 15 128 101 27 6.0 -- 5 -- -- 0.0 -- -- 2

Now he has 2 more force fumbles and 1 INT, but his tackles were way down and sacks also. Now this does have to do with the fact that he was injured for part of the season, but we can all agree that his stats were down.

So who do I think should have been in the cover vote for the 49ers? Vernon Davis. And that only has to do with how he stepped up at the end of the season. What one moment was better last year then Davis's catch to secure the win over the Saints? Now over all his stats were down last year also:

G GS Rec Yds Avg Lng TD
16 16 67 792 11.8 44 6
16 16 56 914 16.3 66T 7

But how awesome would it have been to see a picture of Davis on the cover of Madden? My guess is it would be the picture of him catching the ball.

31 years after the 1981 season, "The Catch" is still the first thing that comes to mind. I think in the future this season will be remembered by the "The Catch 3".

Well I have been trying to find a formula to decide who the 49ers are going to draft, and I think I have come up with a can't miss solution. The 49ers usually draft: 1. People name Smith, and 2. People with obscene sounds names. So with that said, here is my 3 round mock draft.

Round 1: Fletcher Cox (DE,6-4,295); Can you imagine the headlines if both Cox and Cox get through the O-Line and get a sack? Just think of the double penetration jokes that the media can make following the games. I say make it happen.

Round 2: Harrison Smith (SS,6-2,214); Matt Flynn drops back for the pass. Smith hits him right when he releases the ball. Smith tips the ball on the line. The ball is intercepted by Smith. Game over! 49ers win! For we all know it's one, two, three Smith's you're out, at the old ball game.

Round 3: Michael Smith (RB,5-9,205); Smith gets the ball, but he fumbles it, it is recovered by Smith who starts running to the goal line. He laterals the ball to Smith who takes it the rest of the way! Touchdown!!! I do not know what just happened, but I liked it.

Hello everyone! Well I thought I would throw out my opinion of the ‘to sign or not to sign' Mike Wallace debate. Wallace was picked in the 3rd round of the 2009 draft. So I thought I would look at the last 5 players picked in the first round of the past 5 years, and see if any of them have had as good or a better start to their career.

I am actually doing the research as I write this, so I don't know what is going to come out... but oh well.

2011:
Mark Ingram - RB (474yards, 5TDS)
Gabe Carimi - OT (starting RT, got hurt 2nd game)
Muhammad Wilkerson - DE (49 tackles, 3 sacks, 1 safety, 1 forced fumble)
Cameron Heyward - DE (11 tackles, 1 sack, 1 forced fumble, 1 blocked field goal)
Derek Sherrod - OT (Did not start)

2010:
Jared Odrick - DT (23 tackles, 7 sacks, 1 INT, 1 forced Fumble)
Kyle Wilson - CB (62 tackles, 2 INTs)
Jahvid Best - RB (945 yards, 6 TDs, 774 Receving yards, 3 TDs)
Jerry Hughes - DE (21 tackles, 1 sack)
Patrick RObinson - CB (68 tackles, 3 INTs)

2009:
Eric Wood - C (33 starts)
Hakeem Nicks - WR (3,034 yards, 24TDs)
Kenny Britt - WR (1,765 yards, 15TDs)
Beanie Wells - RB (2,237 yards, 19TDs)
Ziggy Hood - DT (58 tackles, 5.5 sacks)

2008:
Antoine Cason - CB (229 tackles, 1 sack, 9 INTs)
Lawrence Jackson - DE (118 tackles, 17 sacks, 3 forced fumbles)
Kentwan Balmer - DT (hahahahahahahaha)
Dustin Keller - TE (2,559 yards, 15 TDs)
Kenny Phillips - S (231 tackles, 8 INTs)

2007:
Joe Staley - OT (awesome, pro-bowl)
Ben Grubbs - G (pro-bowl)
Buster Davis - WR (out of the league)
Greg Olsen - TE (2,521 yards, 25 TDs)
Anthony Gonzalez - WR (1,307 yards, 7 TDs)

Mike Wallace - 3,195 yards, 24 TDs

Now we can take away a couple of things from this:

1. None of the receivers taken made it to the pro-bowl (Wallace did in 2011)
2. Based on numbers alone, Wallace is better then all receivers. The closest is Nicks, who was also taken in 2009.
3. The 49ers had 1 awesome pick and 1 horrible pick. However they were during a different regime.
4. The 2 TEs taken have performed well in the league. (Coby Fleener anyone?)
5. Wallace is better than 96% of the players listed above and we should sign him (Staley is awesome)

Hello everyone!

I just wanted to share some of my thoughts from week 2 of the pre season so far.

NFC West:

The Seahawks and Cardinals have no O-Line.  Their QBs have spent more of the pre season running around than passing.  I am predicting 7 sacks against the Seahawks week 1.

Also, both new QBs (Jackson and Kolb) don't look good.  There was a point where I was hoping the 49ers would get Kolb but now I am glad we didn't.

Aldon Smith is looking like a better pick the Peterson.  The Packers picked him apart.

Thoughts on Other Teams:

Andrew Luck is either going to get drafted by the Bengals or Bills.  Those teams are just so bad this year.

Hasslehoff got hurt again.  No wonder he needs a good O-Line.  I have bought eggs at the store that are more durrable.

My moneys is on Tim Tebow being traded by the end of the year.  Probably to the Dolphins. Unless they pick up Pryor in the supp draft.

If Manning doesn't play for the Colts week 1 I don't believe they are going to make the play-offs. He makes that team good.

Well that is it.  I mainly wanted to talk about how bad the Seahawks and Cardinals look.  We need that win week 1 against the Seahaks.  it is going to be a long season if we lose.

This post isn’t about the current NBA draft, but the format of the NBA draft and if the NFL should adopt the same format type.  I had to do a lot of research to figure out exactly how it works, but this is the best explanation I can give.

The NBA uses a lottery format to determine who gets the top 3 picks of the draft.  Every team that didn’t make the playoffs or playoff teams that hold the rights to draft picks of teams that didn’t make the playoffs (think Pats holding the Raiders pick) are entered into the lottery.  There are only 14 non playoff teams in basketball (compared to the 20 in football).  The non playoff teams are then ranked in order from worst to best.  The worst team gets a 25% chance of winning, while the best team gets a .5% chance of winning.  Then each team gets numbers out of 1000 numbers.  The worse team with a 25% chance gets 25% of the numbers, which is 250 numbers.  The best team only gets .5% of the numbers, or 5 numbers.

Follow me after this cool jump here for some more information: (Warning: Mathematical content)

Continue reading this post »

Well this has nothing to do with the 49ers but it is football related.  I have really started to take a likening to OchoCinco.  I don’t know if he is just trying to get attention but I am honestly amused by what he is doing, and it makes me wonder what he is going to try next.

First it was dancing with the stars.  He didn’t win but he did win a wife (does that make sense?) All this while filming a reality TV dating show I believe.  But it turns out that the is better at touchdown dances instead of real dances.

Next he tried out with the Kansas City soccer team.  Now he said that soccer was always his first love so that might have been legit.  He didn’t make the team but is an ‘honorary’ member or something like that.  Plus does anyone else remember when he kicked the extra point?  I think it was a preseason game though, but I think that proves that he really is into soccer.

Finally he game bull riding a shot.  Any one else wanted him to stay on long enough to rename the bull Marvin Lewis??  I mean I don’t think it was possible to fall off quicker then he did, but it was still fun nonetheless.

So what does everyone think he is going to try next?  Basketball and hockey season are over so those 2 are out.  I am thinking MMA or bowling. 

Well last year I finally bought a Willis Jersey.  I’m not sure why it took so long, I think I just wanted him to sign an extension before I bought one.  This year I am thinking a Davis jersey.  I would like to get a Mays one, but I want to make sure he starts getting more playing time.

But on to my idea… I want to get a ‘Smith’ Jersey and for the number just put a question mark.  I mean we have like 18 players on the team with the last name Smith, so I think they will all be covered.  Or maybe the number 49.

So just to make general discussion, what is the worst jersey you have ever bought or received as a gift?  (It doesn’t have to be 49ers).  Also, are you going to get one for any of the newly drafted players?  I like Kaep just because his last name is cool.

The worst Jersey I ever received as a present was my friend got me a custom jersey with my last name on it.  Well the number was 80, and I was thinking that it was kind of sacrilegious to have one with Rice’s number on it.  Plus the jersey was a 3X and I am nowhere near that big.  I haven’t worn it.

(Please note: This post is only 63% serious, take everything with a grain of salt)

As you all probably know, starting tomorrow is the Cricket World Cup Championship Match!!!  An always favorite Sri Lanka (yes it really is a country) is going against a perennial powerhouse India.  However India hasn’t won the World Cup in 28 years, this time they are playing on their home soil.

For those of you living under a rock and don’t know how cricket is played, here is a quick rundown.  It is a combination of bowling, baseball, golf, and track.  A bowler bowls the ball (kind of like a funky baseball pitch, but it is called bowling) and tries to knock the wicket off of these sticks behind the batsman.  The batsman has this ‘bat’ but it is more like a paddle you would get at an adult toy store.  He hits the ball and he and his partner run back an fourth between the wickets scoring runs.  A batsman is only out if a fielder catches the ball, or the wickets get hit before the batsman crosses this line.

I'm guessing it started when neighbors were throwing rocks at each others fences and they used 2 by 4's to try to hit the rocks before they hit the fence.

A traditional game can go on for a week, since the batsman keeps going until he gets out.  Additional on the field there are side games like ‘whose grass grows the fastest’ and ‘my paint can dry faster than yours’ competition; both of which draw huge crowds.

I have been talking with LondonNiner and apparently he paid $600 for nose bleed seats.  But that does include tea-time!  Also on a side note, apparently Jerry Jones owns that stadium.  This is the India’s captains last world cup before he retires, so you can imagine the pressure the team is under.  However they do think he might unretire and asked to be traded away.  Never mind that is just Favre.

I think it is going to be a close game with Sri Lanka only winning by 20 – 30 runs.  (Yes, that is a close game).  Final score possible 254 - 238. Well what does everyone think?

I want to start off by saying that while I was around when the kickoff rule was first changed, I really couldn’t comprehend the rule change.  But when I am thinking about the new rule am I the only one that thinks kickoffs might be more dangerous?

Right now the rule committee is assuming that if the kickoff is moved up to the 35 yard line that kickers will always kick it into the end zone for a touchback.  Well touchbacks are going to be moved up to the 25 yard line, which means the offensive is just that much closer to scoring.

What is to stop the kickers from pooch kicking the ball to inside the 5 or 10 yard line and make the receiving team return it?  The kicking team is 5 yards closer so they will get down faster making the tackle.  Kick offs will essentially be like punting.  Kickers will learn how to kick the ball higher so the return team can get down in time to down it inside the 20.  Knowing this is the strategy the return team will either 1. Stop the kicking team from downing the ball or 2. Get better at returning the ball.

So if the rules committee is trying to make kick offs safer just get rid of them, however then you wouldn’t have onside kicks… or Devin Hester returns.

I would like to say that I hate this proposed rule change.  Kickoffs are some of the most exciting plays of the game (Colts vs Bears Super bowl?) .  Plus I hate this hypocrisy that owners want to make players safer… but want to go to an 18 game season.

What do you think?  Rule change… good or bad idea?

For those of you that have never seen or heard about the TV 'The League' I highly recommend it.  It is about 5 friends playing fantasy football and all the crazy antics that go with it.  People getting ‘trade raped’ and lots of appearances from NFL players and hosts; one of the guys calls Terry Bradshaw for fantasy advice.

Well the site that they use to play has a message board on it and the guys are always posting videos on the message board.  However I have never used a fantasy site that allows you to post videos.

I know 75% of the people on this site have played fantasy football, so I was wondering if anyone knew of a site that you could post videos on?  I have used Fanball, Yahoo, MSN… but nothing.

Go 49ers!!

What is the easiest position for transition from college to pros, and will that dictate who the 49ers pick with their #7 pick.  Very few rookies start their first year, and even fewer can do it with no prep time at all.  One of the exceptions was Crabtree.  After a long holdout he was able to step in an actually produce with about 10 days of training.

The other end of the spectrum was J. Russell.  Maybe he isn’t a great example because he has no work ethic, but it shows that some positions are easier to make the switch.  If we draft a QB with #7 and the first year is going to be a complete waste, why not wait a year when there is a mathematical shot at getting Luck, whereas right now there is zero chance.

Never playing football I would guess that the easiest positions to transfer from college to pros would be kicker and punter… but that isn’t going to happen.  I have seen that running back and D-Line is easy also, but we wouldn’t draft a running back, and while D-Line is a possibility I don’t see it happening.

Between CB and OLB I would think that CB would be the easiest to make the transition.  You have your guy, you cover your guy, and while NFL receivers are faster than college ones I don’t see things being more complex.  With OLBs you have to worry about blitzing, dropping in coverage, spying the QB and other stuff.  It seems more complex than being a CB.

So my question is that if there is only 10 days of camp before the season starts, who couple step in immediately and make a difference; a CB or OLB?

I would like to start off by saying that I agree with 95% of the Rooney Rule, but there is one part of it that bothers me and it involves an instance current ongoing in the NFL.  First some background.

The Rooney Rule was established in 2003 and states that a team has to interview a minority candidate for head coaching and other senior positions before hiring anyone.  The number of minority coaches has jumped since 2003 but no one knows if it is because of the rule or just coincidence.

Now there are some exceptions to the rule.  For instance; if an assistant coach has wording in his contract that he will be promoted to head coach after a certain amount of time then no minority candidate has to be interview.  See Mike Martz being hired as the Rams head coach. (I know this was before the rule, but it is just to show what I mean about the contract wording.)  Also the rule does not apply if a minority assistant coach takes over for a head coach mid season.  See Mike Singletary being hired.

Here is what bothers me; I don’t think it is fair that Leslie Frazier can be promoted to head coach immediately but Jason Garrett has to wait while Jerry Jones interviews a minority candidate to fulfill the Rooney Rule.  Both coaches took over mid season and lead their respected teams to better records then the previous coaches.  Is there really a doubt in anyone’s mind that Jones would hire someone other than Garrett?

Back in 2003 the Lions were fined $200,000 for violating the rule.  Their reason was that they tried to interview a minority candidate but that person backed out since it was pretty much a given that the Lions were going to hire Mariucci.  Plus every year people talk about how a team “violated the spirit of the rule” by interviewing a minority candidate just to check that box.  See the Seahawks last year.

Are the Cowboys going to be accused of violating the ‘spirit’ the rule if they get a quick interview in before hiring Garrett? Probably.  But Garrett took a 1-7 team to a 5-3 record over the last part of the season with a back-up QB.  Shouldn’t that be enough to get a hire without having to worry about the Rooney Rule?

Now I don’t want to get in a racial debate here, so please don’t go too far off topic.  I am wondering if there should be an amendment to the Rooney Rule that states “If a head coach is fired and an assistant takes over with more than X number of games left in the season he can be hired without having to interview other candidates?”  (With X being like 4 or 5.)  What do you think?

Well Niner Faithful it has been a rough 6 years.  We will all remember the day the Rodgers was passed over for Smith, and 6-years later we still don't have a QB of the Future.

As this latest disappointing season comes to an end we have to ask ourselves "Is this going to be Smith's last game in a 49ers uniform?"  How will he be received by the crowd?

I believe this will be his last game for us and I don't see him as a long term starter in the future.

What do you think?

I have a serious question that I think should be discussed before this offseason begins, and I know I am not the only one who wants to ask it.  I believe it was talked about once but I am not completely sure.

What is the difference between a GM, Head Coach, and VP of Player Personnel?

Like what is Trent Baalke's job and how close are his duties to what a GM would do?  Would it be better to hire a head coach and have him pick the GM? 

It seems throughout the league different teams have different 'leaders'.  In New England there is no doubt that Belichick is in charge but with the Boys and Raiders the owners rule all.

So could someone please explain what the duties of each position is?

Thanks.

(Random question in the poll)

There has been a lot of talk in recent weeks that the NFC West may be the first conference to send a team with a losing record to the playoffs.  The big debate now is should the NFC West ‘give-up’ its playoff spot to another team with a better record.  The ‘experts’ are saying that if an NFC West team was in another conference then they would never stand a chance of ever getting close to the playoffs.

Well I have decided to do what no ‘expert’ has done yet, and I looked at how each conference has actually faired in the playoffs.  Sure it’s great if you can get to the playoffs, but if you don’t do anything once you are there does it really matter? Cough… Chargers…Cough

I went back and starting at the 2002 – 03 season I noted all postseason wins per conference.  I started there because that is when the current 4 conference divisions started.  Here are some quick findings: the AFC has more wins than the NFC (Pats and Steelers super bowl wins), the AFC East has the most postseason wins with 15, and 1 AFC team and 1 NFC team have the worst postseason record with 6 wins.  Can you guess who they are?

Join me after the jump for the full breakdown.

Continue reading this post »

Since I don't read lips and neither Smith or Singletary is Mic'd I can only guess what they are saying. Here is my guess. Note AS= Alex Smith, MS=Mike Singletary

MS: What the h*ll happened?

AS: Well I was holding onto the ball because I wasn't sure what to do with it and the guy in white hit me so I projected the ball from my hand.

MS: Why didn't you throw the ball?

AS: How do I do that?

MS: Throw?? It is easy, you are an X and you want to throw to the O.

AS: Aren't the O's the defense?

MS: I'm not sure, I thought O was a receiver.

AS: Well if O is the defense then I have been throwing to them all year, but if O is receiver then I am still not sure how to throw the ball to them.

MS: As the QB aren't you suppose to throw the ball?

AS: By throw do you mean skip it to them?

MS: No, hit them in stride.

AS: Oh...

MS: And you know that Frank Gore is only 5' 10" right? While he is a beast you can't throw the same pass to Gore that you can to 6' 3" Davis?

AS: Is Gore and Davis an X or O?

MS: What do I look like a head coach??? I am just actor/motivation speaker; I only play a football coach on TV.

AS: Well I am going to play harder and not smarter and just throw the ball into double coverage and hope for the best. What is that corners name on the Raiders? Since he hasn't been challenged that much I am just going to toss it his way and see what happens.

MS: How about we just run the ball up the middle, the run establishes the pass. Or in your case the run established the interception.

AS: Crazy idea, but how about we get Westbrook more involved, he had a great play.

MS: Is he an X or O...

Like I said I don't know for sure but that is just my guess.

On a side note, does anyone else feel really bad for Westbrook? He passed up opportunities with the Rams and Redskins because he wanted to be on a winning team. And he gets stuck on a team that really needs his help; yet we don't use him.

How is everyone doing?  It has been a while since I have written a FanPost so here is a quick update about me; I left my cussie desk job in DC and took a job supporting the military in Kuwait.  I am not looking forward to watching the football games this year because they are going to be at 0100 in the morning (and we can't drink here).  However I did get club seats to the 49ers game in London this year, so that is a plus.

With all the talk of Reggie Bush losing his Heisman I want to talk about role models for a bit.  This post is along the same lines as Fooch's Hall of Fame post which can be found here: http://www.ninersnation.com/2010/5/24/1484801/off-the-field-conduct-and-hall-of.  Two quick things: 1. This post will not be ‘preachie'; 2. I don't have children.  I am also not going to defend people who use performance enhancing drugs as I believe that is cheating.

Wikipedia says a role model is a ‘person who serves as an example, whose behaviour is emulated by others'.  We all had our role models that we looked up to while growing up; whether it was an athlete, a musician, an actor or a political figure.  Now with a new generation of individuals growing up are the current role models better or worse than the previous generations?  Let's look at some people.

Reggie Bush:  Arguably Bush is one of the best college running backs of all time.  His Heisman shows that he was the best college player that year; in fact at the time he had the 2nd most first place Heisman votes of all time, 2nd only to OJ Simpson.  However it has recently come to light that Bush accepted ‘lavish gifts' from agents to include a limo ride to the Heisman celebration and a house to live in while attending USC.  But does this make him less of a role model?  What does it teach people? Can't I take from this that if I try hard and I am the best at something that I will be rewarded for my efforts?

Bill Walsh:  This one hits close to home.  Walsh is the best football coach of all time (I don't care if you disagree with my article but you can't argue that point).  He had an eye for talent and took a 2-12 team to the super bowl in 2 years.  But everyone seems to over look the fact that he neglected his wife most of the time while coaching and in fact was having an affair with a journalist.  Also he insisted his son was dying of leukemia when it was really AIDS.  But do those things matter?  If your son said "Dad I want to be a football coach like Bill Walsh" would you be upset; what if he said "Dad I want to be a football coach like Mike Leach?"

Superheroes:  While fictional, we all looked up to superheroes while we were kids.  However Sharon Lamb, distinguished professor of mental health at University of Massachusetts-Boston says "Today's superhero is too much like an action hero who participates in non-stop violence; he's aggressive, sarcastic and rarely speaks to the virtue of doing good for humanity. When not in superhero costume, these men, like Iron Man, exploit women, flaunt bling and convey their manhood with high-powered guns."  She says about past comic book superheroes "comic book heroes of the past did fight criminals, she said, "but these were heroes boys could look up to and learn from because outside of their costumes, they were real people with real problems and many vulnerabilities.""  Am I to assume it is okay to say "I want to be like Iron Man" but it is not okay to say "I want to be like Tony Stark?"

Mark Zuckerberg: The youngest billionaire in the world, Mark Zuckerberg is someone we all strive to be like... right? The upcoming movie "The Social Network" apparently doesn't portray Zuckerberg in the best light.  The movie talks about how Zuckerberg "drank himself silly and had lots of sex with coeds."

Well I believe that is enough examples.  What I want to know is there a ratio of good to bad that an individual has to fall in to be considered a ‘role model.'  If someone is 70% good and 30% bad does that make them a role model; what about if someone is 60% good and 40% bad, how about 50/50?  If Reggie Bush becomes the best rusher of all time, we will care about what he did in college?  If your son says "I want to be a running back like OJ Simpson" will you be upset?  Can we forget about Ricky Williams' pot issues if he continues to perform like he has been?  Is Pete Rose a good role model for children?  What about Tiger Woods?

I like to start out by saying I'm not a lawyer, accountant, or any other type of ‘professional'. I have an Associate's degree through the military and I work on computers. With that out of the way, here is my solution.

First of all knock the preseason down to 3 games. 95% of starters are known before game 1, and while they play a little during the preseason it is not enough to warrant 4 games. This will still give rookies and recent free agent signees enough time to prove themselves. But in my opinion if you haven't impressed the coaches in practice and training camp, then I don't think you can make that much of a difference.

Now make the regular season 18 weeks long (right now it is 17) but keep teams playing 16 games. This will do a couple of things; 1, teams will have 2-bye weeks. No longer do teams have to worry about having their bye week in the beginning of the season or the end of the season, with 2 weeks they can be spread out, and give players more time to recover.

2. There will be an extra week of games on TV; more weeks mean more television revenue. Now while your teams will still only be on for 16 games, let's be honest football is football, and we all have a second favorite team we watch. My favorite teams are the 49ers and whoever is playing the Giants.

Plus since players are still only playing in 16 games, there will be no need to rework contracts.

I feel that the idea of a rookie salary cap has been beaten to death, so I won't address it, I will just say I think it is a good idea.

But the point I am trying to make here is extend the season, and give teams 2 bye weeks. I believe it is win/win. What about you?

Fooch's Note: Given that the World Cup is going on (I'm listening to these things right now as Portugal and the Ivory Coast are battling), I think this is an interesting topic to discuss. Particularly in light of stadiums doing what they can to enclose more noise.

Wikipedia defines the vuvuzela ( /vuːvuːˈzeɪlə/) as "a blowing horn up to approximately 1 m (3 ft 3 in) in length. It is commonly blown by fans at football (aka. Soccer) matches in South Africa." For those of you that aren't watching the World Cup right now, they are a constant back drop to the games. You can barely hear the announcers, and I know of some people that are muting their TVs during the game so they don't have to listen to it.

Players are complaining they are unable to hear their team mates, and some fans are complaining that they just plain can't hear. Soccer purists complain that there isn't the tradition chanting, singing, and roaring that is normally heard at games. However on the flip side there isn't as much cursing and verbal abuse either. Right now the soccer gods are looking to ban the vuvuzela for the rest of the tournament.

Noise levels at the stadiums have reached 144 decibels, equivalent to the sound made by a passenger jet. I have also looked at some sound levels at football stadiums. The loudest college stadium is ‘Tiger Stadium' LSU, which has reached 130 decibels. In fact if you google ‘Earthquake Game' there was one time when fans were cheering so loud it registered on the Richter Scale. Arrowhead Stadium has reached 116 decibels.

But here is how it plays into the 49ers. Qwest field was designed to be loud. How loud you ask? Well in 2005 there were 95-false start penalties, which was the most in the NFL. In fact you read about teams getting ready for games there, not only is there crowd noise being played during warm-ups, but teams also practice with ear plugs in... so they definitely can't hear. According to Popular Mechanics Qwest Field has reached 135 decibels.

So should the Vuvuzelas be banned from soccer games? Or should players just suck it up and consider it ‘atmosphere'? Should fans at Qwest Field be told to stop cheering? What do you think?

I was reading over at the Cardinals blog where they were predicting their games this season. The article can be found here: http://www.revengeofthebirds.com/2010/6/9/1509668/predicting-the-arizona-cardinals. They are predicting a win against us in Arizona, which I don't totally agree with but since it is a division game it could go either way (see Seahawks game last year.)

I don't want to focus on that though as I am sure one of the front page authors will cover that as it gets closer to the season.

What I do want to focus on is the ‘key losses' that it lists for the 49ers. There are 6 players listed for key losses, they are: Arnaz Battle (WR), Dre'Bly (CB), Walt Harris (CB), Marcus Hudson (CB), Tony Pashos (OT), and Jeff Ulbrich (LB). I am going to add in one more, Shaun Hill (QB). Let's look at these 7 players and see who are ‘key loss' was.

Arnaz Battle (WR): Was drafted by the 49ers in 2006, round 6: pick 197. Battle was a QB at Notre Damn before being switched to WR. He was drafted by the 49ers to play WR, and as far as I know we never gave him a shot at QB. His states are 178 receptions for 2,150yds and 11 TDs. 887 return yards and 1 return TD. After we lost TO Battle stepped up as the top WR on the team for a while. However after drafting Crabtree last year, Morgan stepping up, signing Jones, and all the other younger WRs on the team we let him go.

Dre' Bly (CB): The 49ers signed Bly after Harris went down in camp. He played in 16 games, started 6. 26 tackles, 1 sack, and 3 ints. However he will always be remembered for his quote that went something like "Dre' Bly will be Dre' Bly and I don't care if I get run down by a WR at home, I am going to show off when I want to show off.." Okay maybe not completely like that.

Walt Harris (CB): The 49ers signed Harris in 2006 at the age of 32ish. In 2006 and 2007 he started 15 games and 16 in 2008. However he went down with an injury in training camp after getting tangled up with a WR. He has about 170 tackles, 2 sacks, and 15 ints with 1 TD.

Shaun Hill (QB): Any one that doesn't know the story about Shaun Hill was living under a rock last off season. He was undrafted, played for the Vikings, played in Europe, got a shot with the 49ers and made the most of it. There was a lot of controversy, and while one could argue about his playing skills, one cannot argue that he was a leader on the team and a presence in the locker room (he was the best-man at Smith's wedding and was always interviewed on ‘The Joe Show'). As soon as the 49ers signed Carr we all knew Hill was gone, but I think it was a disgrace to send him to the Lions for a 2011 7th round pick... WTF?? Plus Hill said he first learned about the trade from the media, that's not cool. When starting he has a 10-6 record.

Marcus Hudson (CB): Hudson was drafted by the 49ers in 2006. While never getting a start he did play on special teams, and has a total of 52 tackles. He has also defended 3 passes. Wikipedia has nothing listed for his Professional Career.

Tony Pashos (OT): Was signed to play RT, got hurt, and didn't play. End of story.

Jeff Ulbrich (LB): In terms of locker room leaders, Ulbrich had been one of the biggest. He was drafted by the 49ers in 2000 during the 3rd round. I believe last year he was admitted as a member of the '10 year wall.' Ulbrich won the starting job in 2001 and started until he got hurt in 2005. He also started a bit in 2006. However in 2007 the 49ers drafted a mutant, super hero, genetic monster, Willis. Ulbrich was still a factor on special teams until a concussion knocked him out for the remainder of the 2009 season.

Well there it is the 49ers ‘key losses'. Are we really going to miss anyone? I mean other then Ulbrich we just let the others go. Who do you believe was our ‘key loss'?

In keeping with the tradition of just trying to find something to talk about, I figured I would step away from talking about individual teams and go with divisions instead.

If you don't know, there are 8 divisions in the NFL broken down to 4 in the AFC and 4 in the NFC. What I liked about the division in football as oppose to baseball, is that there are 4 teams in each division which translates to an equal number of games. Some baseball divisions have 6-teams and is it just weird... but that is a different conversation.

Every year it seems like each division has 2 teams that battle it out until the end for 1st place, and one team that is just awful.

In my opinion the best division this year is going to be the NFC East. There is really no weak team, and all 4 teams can have winning records this year. The Redskins were the worse last year, but with McNabb this year they could easily have a playoff bound year. The AFC East is going to be tough also (with the exception of the Bills.) I don't know who I would pick as the favorite this year in that Division.

I think the surprise division this year is going to be the AFC North. The Browns finished on a winning streak last year, the Ravens and Bengals went to the playoffs, and the Steelers are an enigma. But that division could come down to the final 2 weeks.

As much as it pains me to say it, I think the 2 worse divisions are the 2 on the West Coast. With the exception of the Chargers, 49ers and maybe the Broncos and Seahawks, I don't see anyone else having a winning record.

Well what do you think? Which division is going to be the best? I would define best as best win/loss record.

I couldn't find current stats, but during the 2001 NFL regular season, home teams had a record of 136-112. Home teams improved to 148-107-1 in 2002, and 157-99 in 2003. This translates into a combined win percentage of 58% for those three seasons. It seems clear that playing at home is an advantage.

This advantage ostensibly increases during the playoffs: Home playoff teams were 21-9 from 2001 through 2003 (70%), and 102-38 (73%) from 2000 through 2003. However, this apparent increase can also be attributed to the fact that in the playoffs, generally the team with the better record gets to play at home.

In any given year the chance of the home team being in the Super Bowl 6.25%; that is of course, that the Super Bowl is being played in your conferences stadium, i.e. AFC or NFC. No team has ever had home field advantage in the Super Bowl, but some teams have been close. The 1984 the 49ers played in Palo Alto, California which is 20 miles from San Fran and in Super Bowl XIV the LA Rams played in Pasedena, CA. I believe these have been the closest... but feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

Over the next 4 years, the Super Bowl is going to be held at the following team's stadiums:

2011 - Cowboys

2012 - Colts

2013 - Saints

2014 - Jets/Giants

These 5 teams are among the best in the league right now, and barring any unforeseen circumstances, they will continue to be for the next couple of year.

I want to know, how much do you think home field advantage plays into deciding the winners of games, and do you think in the next five years there will be a team that is in the super bowl in their stadium?

No I’m not drunk, hear me out.  If we sign Russel it will be the first time in history that 3- former 1st overall pick QBs are on the same team!!  Wouldn’t that be cool?  Plus we could say “our 3rd string QB could out eat your 3rd string QB.”

He would also be the only QB in history that could play on the O-Line, and be a Wild Cat option.  Think about it, he could snap the ball to Smith, once the DT rushes by him, Smith could flick the ball up to Russel, who could then throw it down field.  No one would see that coming.

Or we could put him as a DE and sign him to an incentive rich deal.  It would go something like this “For every sack you get we will give you a Double Cheese Burger.  For every interception you will get a Big Mac.  And if you get Defensive Player of the Year we will build you your own Franchise!!”  He would be stupid to turn that down.

What do you think?

While my post doesn’t really have to do with Vanilla Ice or draft needs being or not being met I thought the title was catchy.

O-Line has to be one of the most under-rated jobs in the NFL.  You get blamed for the sacks, and when a running back breaks for a huge run there is a little time spent on the blocking, and more time spent showing the speed of the running back or him breaking tackles.  I bring this up because as we all know, the 49ers drafted 2 O-Linemen in the first round.

My question is, of all the people we drafted, whose jersey do you think you would buy this year??  Like I said O-Linemen are under-rated and it is rare to see people with O-Lineman jerseys.  I have seen a couple of Long jerseys (The dolphins pick from a couple of years ago) and sometimes other big names pop up, but for the most part it is the ‘skill’ positions that get the most coverage. 

Ultimately it would make more sense to get an Lineman’s jersey because there is less chance of them being a bust and they are more incline to play when they are in there 30’s. 

Honestly though, I will probably get a Mays’ jersey this year.  What about everyone else?

Well I am doing it.  After work tonight I am heading up to NYC and I am going to stand inline in front of the Radio City Music Hall trying to get tickets to the draft tomorrow.  The tickets are free, but they are on a first come first serve basis.  My only concern is that is might rain tonight, so it might be a wet wait.  Is anyone else attempting this??

My question is if I do get tickets what should my sign say?  I have to make a sign for the 49ers, but I am not sure what to put on it yet.  I don’t want to make a sign for every possible draft choice, so I need a good generic one.  What does everyone think?

Stick with Alex Smith, start David Carr, wait for Nate Davis, draft Clausen, get Young out of retirement... these are all suggestions that have been thrown around to solve the QB proglem that the 49ers have been having.  There was talk about trading for Vick, but who knows if he is still able to start, there was talk of trading for McNabb, but who knows how much longer he can play, and he hasn’t really faired well under pressure.

Well now the 49ers have a chance to solve their QB problems for the foreseable future… trade for Big Ben.  Why would the Steelers trade their 2-time superbowl winning QB?? Well as NFL.com reports “The Rooneys are livid.”  The whole article can be read here: http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8178b2b1&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

The pros of what Ben brings, experience, super bowl rings, 1 pro bowl, 19,302 passing yard, 91.7 QB rating, 4 seasons of over 3,000 passing yards.

The cons, baggage… major baggage. He has also been sacked a lot and some experts wonder how much longer he can last.  Also of the 7 seasons he has been in the league he has only completed 1.  Okay maybe the first season doesn’t count because he wasn’t the starter in the beginning.. but still. 1 out of 6 is not good.

Would this be a good idea?  I don’t know.  Chances are he will be suspended at least 2 games to start the season, which would not help the 49ers out trying to win an NFC West title.  He would really have to change his attitude also, but I believe that Singeltary would be able to help out… see Davis and Brooks.

What would it cost?  This is the hard one.  They are going to want a QB to replace Ben, so maybe they would want Alex Smith.  However Ben for Smith is not a fair trade at all, so we would be looking at some draft picks. I am thinking at LEAST Smith and 1 first rounder.   However if you look at Cutler last year, he went for 2 first rounders.  However I think the Steelers would take less than that.  I think Smith, a first round this year, and a conditional pick next year which depends on how well Ben plays.  Like when Farve was traded to the Jets.

Once we signed Carr I didn’t like the idea of trading for McNabb, but I am 100% for trading for Ben.  He brings immediate experience to the team, and there would be no way the 49ers wouldn’t be favored to go deep into the playoffs.  Plus with Ben only being 28, we would have him for at least another 7 years.