- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Given what I tend to look for, I am not sure I will see the kind of chemistry that tells me a lot until an important regular season game. I thought they had a lot of that going in the 2012 SF game, the one that ended in a tie. But that team has since been hurt and/or inconsistent. So I wait for a future defining game. Not sure we will see that in August.
I mean, in a sense, you’re certainly correct that pre-season can’t show us what the real season will.
And I know what you mean about team chemistry. The ’12 team had some of that, and it allowed them to play over their heads. And of course chemistry is part of what I’m talking about.
Here’s the distinction I would make, though. No matter how much chemistry the ’12 team had, it could not be a real contender. The talent was simply not there. Playing over their heads, they lacked the capability of actually gaining a competitive advantage. They had to hang in there and hope to ride a fine edge. That’s a formula for 2nd or 3rd tier competitiveness, a team nobody enjoys playing, but one that can be beaten by good teams playing only moderately well.
We’re all hoping that this year, we can compete on the top tier, or damn close to it. That’s what all the 10-6 and playoffs predictions mean.
So what I saying about this year’s team is different from anything that could have been meaningful for the ’12 team. I’m saying that our talent level has markedly improved almost everywhere. We have realistic potential to be special in a lot of areas. To fulfill that potential, the talent has to A) prove to be real in some cases and B) gel into a synergy that can take a decisive edge in most matchups. That’s what contending teams do.
A great example is our WR unit. We have all these indications of perhaps dramatic improvement. We all know the drill on that. And I do think we some some modest signs last week. I notice media articles today on the board with very encouraging quotations from organization guys who are excited about Britt, Bailey, and a perhaps blossoming Quick. Theoretically, those 3 guys give us a talent quotient capable of transforming a sorry-assed unit into a productive one.
And yet, I think of WV saying he’s still a skeptic regarding Quick. And WV has good reason to be skeptical about this guy. 2 years of mediocrity. Can Quick really go from showing flashes in practice into actually beating NFL DBs on a regular basis? Can Britt’s leadership and the eventual addition of Bailey transform this unit into one capable of imposing its will in the league? The answer depends on 2 things: A) is the talent real and 2) can the unit gel?
If we are to do anything this year, it has to happen in the real season, of course. But I think that, if it is real, we’ll start to see stretches of potency from the group in the pre-season. We need to see Bradford developing bonds with Britt, Quick, and Bailey. If we do see it becoming real, that will be a big indication. If we don’t through all 4 games, there will be reason for concern.
Anyway, that’s what I am looking for–units of potential galvanizing into real forces.
By virtue of the absurd ...
If we are to do anything this year, it has to happen in the real season, of course. But I think that, if it is real, we’ll start to see stretches of potency from the group in the pre-season. We need to see Bradford developing bonds with Britt, Quick, and Bailey. If we do see it becoming real, that will be a big indication. If we don’t through all 4 games, there will be reason for concern.
Anyway, that’s what I am looking for–units of potential galvanizing into real forces.
Fair enough.
This isn’t exactly the terms in which you are speaking, but, it’s my angle on it. I don’t know how far up the WRs can step this year, but even if it’s just some, they together with the running game make it a better offense than last year…and last year they had enough to beat some non-NFC west division winning teams with Clemens at qb.
I am just spinning off my own direction now, which in posting circles is still actually considered a direct response.
But then at the exact same time, having put in my optimistic 2 cents, it’s true that it’s a hard to team judge right now in any exact terms because 2013 was different seasons. The Richardson games without defense, the Bradford/Stacy games with defense, the Clemens/Stacy games with defense but at the end without Long. Bailey showed flashes in half the season, Austin disappointed at first and then flashed a lot and got hurt, the defense started out miserable against the run then became very good against the run. We don’t know how much of the secondary was Walton. We don;t know whether the reports on Britt and Quick foretell how they will play this season. The OL may be injury prone, it may not. It may be deeper than usual even if it is injury prone, but hard to say how deep. I think Bradford has already played well, but then at the same time, it’s hard to gauge his ceiling. I keep going back to 2012 for points of reference, but it’s a different team in a lot of ways from that.
I think it was John Clayton who said that with a team like this, promising but not proven, you just need one defining confidence building moment to get them to come together. For example in 99, for many, and probably for the team, that moment was the SF game. For a lot of onlookers it was the Titans game, when they showed heart fighting back, even though they didn’t pull it out.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
