2023 Season | Super Bowl LVIII 49ers @ Chiefs| Gameday Chatter Thread | 2/11/2024

[Simpleton]

I can't believe he stayed healthy the whole season. I bet that never happens again.

He had over 400 touches this past season and nearly 400 in 2022, hard to see him maintaining his level at 28 next year throughout 17 games and the playoffs.

 

[data]

He had over 400 touches this past season and nearly 400 in 2022, hard to see him maintaining his level at 28 next year throughout 17 games and the playoffs.

49ers shouldn’t have any problem winning the NFC West this season. Rams a year older, Seahawks rebuilding and Cardinals gonna Card.

 

[bbgun]

Rams a year older

Aside from Stafford and Donald, who are still playing at a high level, I think they have a pretty young team.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

Aside from Stafford and Donald, who are still playing at a high level, I think they have a pretty young team.

Believe it or not Kupp is already 30. He was an older rookie though. But yes, last year was meant as a rebuilding year for them.

 

[L.T. Fan]

I think now that everyone in the league has seen how Purdy can be contained he will not be as effective going forward. He may have seen his best days . He doesn't have to be completely shut down to impact his team just curtailing the number of short completions will force the Niners to change their passing strategy. Purdy has some exposure when he has to scramble . He isn’t nearly as effective with his accuracy. Being able to take the snap and not having to move to deliver the short throw is his primary strength. Change that and the Niners will have to find a different way to allow Purdy to be effective..

 

[Bill Shatner]

Believe it or not Kupp is already 30. He was an older rookie though. But yes, last year was meant as a rebuilding year for them.

And guess what? They got through the year with 70 odd million in dead cap money. Now they can play in FA.

 

[data]

Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders fame runs the machine to rank the Top 10 NFL dynasties. The current Chiefs regime knocks 90s Cowboys out of the Top 10.

1. Belichick Patriots
2. Montana/Young 49ers
3. Lombardi Packers
4. Landry Cowboys
5. 1940s Bears
6. Bradshaw Steelers
7. 1950s Browns
8. 70s Raiders
9. 1930s Packers
10. Andy Reid Chiefs

Dynasty Rankings Update 2024

The Kansas City Chiefs are now a dynasty. Where do they stand among the greatest dynasties in NFL history? And can we measure the heartbreak for the 49ers?

www.ftnfantasy.com

 

[data]

Not sure how much more money he made by signing with Dolphins, but now it’s two Super Bowl rings and further HOF credentials that Tyreek Hill has lost out on.

 

[bbgun]

I wouldn't worry about the HOF. He's killing it in Miami (back-to-back 1700 yard seasons).

 

[Genghis Khan]

1. Belichick Patriots
2. Montana/Young 49ers
3. Lombardi Packers
4. Landry Cowboys
5. 1940s Bears
6. Bradshaw Steelers
7. 1950s Browns
8. 70s Raiders
9. 1930s Packers
10. Andy Reid Chiefs

40s Bears
50s Browns
30s Packers
and especially the 70s Raiders are absurd to include.

The first three are completely irrelevant to today's game (would anyone say, "yeah the 50s Yankees were good but they were nothing compared to the 1879 Red Legs"? Of course not, it's absurd.)

The 70s Raiders are even more egregious because they weren't even a dynasty by any acceptable standard.

Including the Young super bowl in the Walsh 49ers dynasty is some serious mental gymnastics.

I'd put the 90-95 Cowboys at 3, behind the Belichick/Brady Patriots (1) and the Lombardi Packers (2). Then 70s Steelers (4), and 80s 49ers (5). Reid / Mahomes Chiefs are next (for now) and then 70s Cowboys.

 

[ravidubey]

Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders fame runs the machine to rank the Top 10 NFL dynasties. The current Chiefs regime knocks 90s Cowboys out of the Top 10.

1. Belichick Patriots
2. Montana/Young 49ers
3. Lombardi Packers
4. Landry Cowboys
5. 1940s Bears
6. Bradshaw Steelers
7. 1950s Browns
8. 70s Raiders
9. 1930s Packers
10. Andy Reid Chiefs

Dynasty Rankings Update 2024

The Kansas City Chiefs are now a dynasty. Where do they stand among the greatest dynasties in NFL history? And can we measure the heartbreak for the 49ers?

www.ftnfantasy.com

I guess he's strongly influenced by how many championship/Superbowl games you compete in, a high standard and consistency in the regular season, and rightly favors Superbowls to older championships given the lesser competition.

Hard to disagree too much...

I think he has the 70's raiders too high by any standard. Two championships, three games over ten years... not cutting it, they need to be out of the top ten. The 40's Bears gained the nickname Monsters of the Midway and won 5 of 7-- but they are too high.

The biggest knock against our dominant 1990's teams was how fast they flamed out post Jimmy.

I think that team at its peak was the most talented and dominant of the pre-free agency era evidenced by how consistently they whipped even very good teams by 10+ points. But 1991-1995 (I shudder to include 1996) six competitive years, 3/3 championships barely counts as a dynasty, really.

 

[ravidubey]

I'd put the 90-95 Cowboys at 3, behind the Belichick/Brady Patriots (1) and the Lombardi Packers (2). Then 70s Steelers (4), and 80s 49ers (5). Reid / Mahomes Chiefs are next (for now) and then 70s Cowboys.

I think it's a subtle difference. The rankings in this case doesn't refer to how good the team was, but how good a dynasty they were. 90's Dallas failed the test of longevity, and barely qualified as a dynasty.

 

[Irving Cowboy]

The 70s Raiders are even more egregious because they weren't even a dynasty by any acceptable standard.

This is what stood out to me

 

[boozeman]

I can't believe he stayed healthy the whole season. I bet that never happens again.

Health sometimes is flukey. This was his fluke.

 

[Genghis Khan]

90's Dallas failed the test of longevity, and barely qualified as a dynasty.

Sorry but this is absurd.

The current 5 year run of the Chiefs somehow passed that same longevity test?

Bullshit.

Hell, you could make a similar argument against the 70s Steelers, who's actual run was about 74-79. There's really not much difference.

The only people who make this nonsense argument are basically doing mental gymnastics to try to specifically diminish the 90s Cowboys DYNASTY.

The first team to win 3 super bowls in 4 years, a feat that to this day has been duplicated only once, isn't a dynasty?

GFY with that bullshit.

 

[Bill Shatner]

How does Landry Cowboys rank above Bradshaw Steelers?

0-2 when it counted.

 

[Genghis Khan]

How does Landry Cowboys rank above Bradshaw Steelers?

0-2 when it counted.

Yep. And 4 wins overall for those Steelers. Definitely 70s Steelers over 70s Cowboys unfortunately.

That's not even to diminish what the 70s Cowboys were, because appearing in a full 50% of the super bowls that decade is very impressive and no doubt one of the better dynasties ever.

But definitely behind the Steelers of that era (and probably behind the 90s Cowboys for that matter).

 

[ravidubey]

The current 5 year run of the Chiefs somehow passed that same longevity test?

I didn't say anything about Reid's Chiefs, but looking objectively...

With Mahomes, they are like our 1990's team, except they have one more Superbowl appearance in one less years.

When you look at Reid's tenure beyond and including Mahomes, he has nine straight playoff and six straight AFCC appearances, won 12 or more games six times, and 14 or more twice.

Dallas went to the playoffs six straight times, had four straight NFCC's, won 12 or more games three times and have never won 14 games in our history.

The Chiefs just repeated with minimal WR or RB talent to speak of and there's no end in sight. Meanwhile we were 6-10 by 1997, two years from our last Superbowl.

By what objective measure are they lower than Dallas?

 

[ravidubey]

Yep. And 4 wins overall for those Steelers. Definitely 70s Steelers over 70s Cowboys unfortunately.

That's not even to diminish what the 70s Cowboys were, because appearing in a full 50% of the super bowls that decade is very impressive and no doubt one of the better dynasties ever.

But definitely behind the Steelers of that era (and probably behind the 90s Cowboys for that matter).

Those 70's Cowboys were sandwiched between a 60's group that competed for titles but couldn't quite get there and an 80's group that lost three straight NFCC's. They had 20 consecutive winning seasons. Dude, that defines the term dynastic.

More dynastic than the Steelers who were only competitive over eight straight playoff seasons from 1972-1979.

Again the list is talking about the Landry Cowboys. That's a powerful legacy

 

[Genghis Khan]

When you look at Reid's tenure beyond and including Mahomes, he has nine straight playoff and six straight AFCC appearances, won 12 or more games six times, and 14 or more twice.

Entirely and completely irrelevant. What did Noll do outside of the Steelers actual dynasty? What did Walsh do outside theirs? What did Lombardi do?

It's completely irrelevant in evaluating the actual dynasty.

The Chiefs just repeated with minimal WR or RB talent to speak of and there's no end in sight.

No end in sight is subjective and also irrelevant. Mahomes could get injured tomorrow. We don't know what's going to happen, we can only evaluate it on what's actually happened. (If I were to guess, they look like they're on the decline. They won this year because it was an extremely weak year around the league.)

Meanwhile we were 6-10 by 1997, two years from our last Superbowl.

Again, irrelevant what happened outside of the dynasty. Come on now.

By what objective measure are they lower than Dallas?

3 super bowl wins in 4 years, versus 3 wins in 5. That objective enough for you?

Super Bowl losses count, but wins matter more. Otherwise you're arguing for the 90s Bills, who have more appearances than us in that span.