From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Re: More predictions
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 03:27:02 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.021315.13521@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:

>What a weekend.  I went 2-2 on predictions for a playoff total of 5-3.

2-2 sounds about right for you, dear Gordon.  After all, even a stopped
clock is right twice a day.

>Review:

>>Predictions:  
>>Washington 27  SF 10
>>
>>Washington is hot with impressive individual performances as well as team
>>efforts.  SF had a week off and may be distracted by the Montana issue.
>>Close first half with second half special team play that breaks it open
>>for Washington.  SF goes with Young the whole way leaving fans to question
>>Seifert and starting an off-season qb controversy.

>Well, I was way off here.  No doubt that a good overall team can beat a
>so-so team even if they have some great performances.  Of course,
>Washington *didn't* have any great performances.  I wasn't too far off on
>Young's play.  I thought it might leave people wondering a bit and there
>were some comments in the paper.  4 turnovers, tsk, tsk.

Y'know, Storga, it won't kill you to admit the Niners are a great team.
Granted, Saturday's performance blew chow, but the Niners showed perhaps
the season's best defensive performance and respectable special-teams
play -- things that I've heard count in the post-season.  As for Young --
you screwed the pooch.  His day as QB was fantastic; his day as a runner
was marked with flukes and sillies for which there is no reason to assume
will repeat next week.

As far as "4 turnovers, tsk, tsk" goes, I remember a Niners game about
11 years ago that featured *six* SF turnovers.  They still won.  Care
to guess what game that was?

>>SD 21  Miami 17
>>Marino can't do it alone, and yes, he's still alone.  SD - not pretty but
>>gets the job done.

>Big error.  Don't bet against Shula at home.  Team effort comes through 
>for Miami.  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I won't harp on this one, as I too picked the Bolts, but let's hold
the above thought.

>Predictions for the championships:
>
>Dallas 31  SF 21
>SF doesn't appear to have the defense to stop Dallas.  The turf might be
>the deciding factor, but Smith has shown he can run on natural grass.

Get ready, football fans -- Gordon's priming us for a rejoinder of
"Emmitt can run on turf or grass, but not on mud.  Why play on that
icky green stuff in this day and age anyway?"

>Passing games are farely even with the advantage in TE production going to
>Dallas.  

"Farely [sic] even" -- yeah, right.  One the Niners side, they have the
QB that led the league in passing the last two years.  They have the
best WR in history (those who disagree can cheerfully stuff it).  They
have John Taylor and two great backups.  They have three backs who are
very good receivers.  They have a healthy, veteran OL that's optimized
for pass protection.  Oh -- and they're disadvantaged to have an All-Pro
TE in Brett Jones.

Dallas has -- er, Troy Aikman, the QB whom dear Gordon claimed the Bowboys
would win in spite of, rather than because of.  None of the receiving
weapons matter if the QB can't haul the mail.

Sounds pretty even to me.  (not.)

>SF has to face the #1 defense, Dallas doesn't.  

Funny how Gordon didn't point out that Dallas has to face the #1 offense.

>Dallas can run on anyone.  

That's what they were saying about the Deadskins two days ago.

>Dallas looked sharp, SF looked lethargic.  Barring injury it
>should be a Dallas victory.

It's really a shame you don't bet on these things.  (But I don't blame you.)

>Buffalo 35  Miami 17
>Buffalo has too much offense for Miami's defense, and just enough
>defense for Miami's O.  Miami has been inconsistent at times.  I
>shouldn't go against Shula, and I'd like to see the rematch with the
>Cowboys, but I'm taking Buffalo for a record tying 3rd consecutive SB
>appearance.

Contrast with above remark about betting against Miami at home.  Well,
what more can be expected from a Texan?

>Interesting aspects to next week:
>If Miami wins it sets up a definate rematch SB against Dallas or SF,
>both Miami losses.  Miami would also set the record with 6 SB
>appearances.  This record would be tied if Dallas beats SF, which would
>also give Dallas a 4-1 record against SF in NFC championships.  If SF

Oh?

'70 - Dallas wins
'71 - Dallas wins
'81 - Niners win

You're going to give the Bowboys credit for two victories if they knock
off the Niners this week?  In your words, "tsk, tsk."  Better wind that
clock; you've used up your allotment of correctness for the postseason.

*********

All seriousness aside:

I fully recognize that the Bowboys are formidable opposition to the Niners
this weekend.  As was the case in '81, this game is the unofficial Super
Bowl.  (Screw you AFC weenies who disagree -- win the Big Dance once,
then we'll talk.)  The right two teams made it to the title game and both
have a fair chance at winning it.

BUT:

Gordon's above arguments are full of holes and I wouldn't be a proper
card-carrying Niners fan without debunking them.  After Saturday's fiasco,
the Niners are going to come out breathing fire.  They'll also be able
to stuff the Dallas run, forcing air Leakman into multiple miscues and
rather neutralizing Dallas' offense in general.  And if the Niners have
gotten their quota of wierd botches out of the way, look for the offense
to put some numbers up.

Niners 23 -- Bowboys 13.


-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974