Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Niners confirm the smokescreen


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

Yeah, because Ohio State at Clemson did not have that.  Yet Jones won the national title, completed nearly 80% of his passes (Waddle injured), and averaged 350 yards a game--all higher than Fields and Lawrence. 

But your stats are good too.  You make a compelling argument.

I don’t even think Stidham had much NFL talent around him on offense at Auburn? Burrow would have made more sense, but he looks good in the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

That's not a high mark to hit. The ACC only fielded one P5 caliber program last year and that was Clemson.

Most of the league would have struggled against Coastal Carolina or App St.

 

Edit: Maybe Miami.

How many did the SEC field then, 3?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

The "better than everyone else" dart could be lobbed at just about everyone but Wilson. Lawrence, Fields, Jones and Lance all had star studded teams. 

But to be fair, Wilson had Brady “Stonewall” Christensen - greatest LT in the history of college football and future NFL first ballot HOFer!!

  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawrence was one, Wilson was two.  What would they need a smokescreen for?  Getting some team to trade up to 4?  

I don't buy the smokescreen theory.  There would have been no need to create one because there would have been no one for them to trade up to in front of them for Lance.

IMO they initially thought Jones was their man but later determined that Lance was too good to pass up. 

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only guess would be concerns about a team trading with the Jets or the Jets considering Lance once they realized how badly the Niners wanted him? I know at one point the Jets were considering trading the pick and keeping Darnold, not sure if the timing aligns with the “smokescreen” or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:

I'm saying those rankings were pretty laughable since most of the conferences played in conference only(or pretty close). 

If you want proof of that, reference the 0-6 ACC bowl record. So, we basically finished the same way that Conference USA did. 0-6.

Frankly, even Clemson was probably a little bit of a paper tiger.

Lol, three of those losses were to the #1 ranked and eventual NC, #3 ranked and #5 ranked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, OldhamA said:

How many did the SEC field then, 3?

The SEC fared pretty well OOC during bowl season. I don't know if they were the strongest conference but they did go 3-0 versus the ACC. 

I would imagine that the traditional ACC vs. SEC seasonal matchups would likely have been similarly tilted.

The ACC just wasn't good last year versus a couple of seasons ago when we were very clearly the best conference.

Edited by kungfoodude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah, when you draft a guy you have to understand and realize you're going to be giving him a contract commensurate with that draft position. It is what it is. If you don't want to do that for anyone on the board, trade down. Hell, pull a Vikings and sit on your ass and let the time run out and the next team up pick. LOL! But don't draft the guy and then think you're going to get away with some contract shenanigans. Hell, his agent can't allow it looking out for his own interests. If Stewart was willing to sign a deal wildly out of step with the norm on a bad way his agent would probably tell him he's got a walk. If I want to sign future 1st round draft prospects I can't be a part of this.
    • Yea, I don't know why they are insisting this new clause to be be included. (well its money, its always money). Just the issue, or one of the big issues, is no other team is doing it. They are trying to start a trend..... guess what the team picked right after and before stewart didn't not have this clause in the contract and they have already signed. They totally look like the bad guy in all this and like I posted before, their rep is awful among agents.  Mike Brown uses his daughter negotiate contracts cause she took law courses. Look it up, many say if she is doing that, she is the GM... I bet you can not guess who the GM is....... save you some time, there isn't one.... so maybe it is the daughter....
    • Eh, I can see where you're coming from, but at the same time, unless the new jerseys were just god awful ugly, how many people would just cancel their order at that point? Those people, like myself, bought it because they wanted T-Mac's jersey, not because they loved the current uniforms and just wanted one. But I kinda hope they do give us new uniforms next offseason, just like with Cam, so this version of T-Mac's jersey will always be his "rookie jersey" which would be pretty neat.  It was pretty well known at the time that we were getting new jersey's that next season so I waited to get my Cam until then and got an Authentic one, which is great, but I do still kinda regret not having a Cam rookie jersey in my collection.
×
×
  • Create New...