From: timr@sco.COM (Tim Ruckle)
Subject: NFC West (and the 49ers) [was Re: NFC East (and the Cowboys)]
Organization: The Gifted and the Damned
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 21:15:53 GMT
Summary: best won-loss-tie percentage in the NFL



heh heh.  everybody loves to see the other guys' swagger turn to a limp.
the Most Dominant Division in the League, the dreaded NFC East: swept.  
skunked.  debunked.

please note that the absolute best won-lost-tie percentage in the league
belongs to....the NFC West (at .575).  we will, or course, allow you to
marginally improve your .560 percentage if your defending Super Bowl champs
can manage to beat the Saints on Monday night.  otherwise you will spiral
ever downward towards the other riffraff (AFC Central at .550, AFC West
and East at .460, and the poor NFC Central at .420).

woof.

Va negvpyr <1992Nov16.182920.3317@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>
blah@maas-neotek.arc.nasa.gov (TWF) jevgrf:
} Quick question:  Does anyone know the last time that all of the NFC
} East teams lost on the same weekend?...

as has been reported, first time since the merger.  i wonder if this
qualification simply highlights the fact the the NFC East didn't exist
before the merger, or if something marginally similar has occurred in
the deep dark history of the NFL?

closest thing the a pre-merger NFC East looks to be the '68 Capital
Division of the Eastern Conference: which had Dallas, N.Y. Giants,
Washington, & Phillidelphia.  for some strange reason, the year before
and after that the N.Y. Giants were part of the Century Division, and
New Orleans was in the Capital Division.  before that there were just
Eastern and Western Divisions, American or National Conferences, or
Eastern and Western Conferences.

(Ob-Trivia: Dallas had the best record in the Eastern Conference that
year at 12-2, but lost to the Century Division champs from Cleveland in
the Conference Championship, who were themselves shut out by the Colts
in the NFL Championship, who were then beat by the Jets in Super Bowl III)

} Anyone who thinks Haley doesn't mean a lot to the defense - see
} Sunday's game.  

anybody else who thinks the Haley trade has some weird karmic connection
to the 49ers' aquisition of Fred Dean from the Cowboys years ago?  (that
_is_ the trade i'm thinking of, right?...)

-timr

} PS. (to John Gloria or someone else in the Bay area):  is the Examiner
} or Comical claiming (perhaps rightfully so) that the Niners are now
} the best team in the NFL?  Just wondering if everyone out there is
} back on the Niner's bandwagon (unlike last year) ...

no, in general the local media pundits seem to enjoy bashing the niners
as much as the net.community does.  i guess that sells more papers, and
maintains their ``journalistic integrity''....

here's the lead-in from the front-page article in the SF Chron's Sporting
"Green" this morning:

 I hate to be one of those people who toots his own horn, but his is too
 obvious to pass up.  Did I have those 49ers pegged or what?
 Sure enough, quarterback Steve Young is running willy-nilly all over the
 field, Jerry Rice isn't getting the ball, the running game is in the hands
 of a little-known second-round draft pick, the secondary has looked shaky,
 the kicking game is inconsistant, and there is hardly any pass rush to
 speak of.
 It is all happening precisely as I predicted.  I only made one tiny
 miscalculation--I thought that all that would hurt them.
 Instead, they are setting the standard for football.  All over the country,
 teams are trying to put less experience in their defensive backfield,
 slowing down their pass rush and working on plays that will keep the ball
 out of the hands of their best players.  It's working for San Francisco
 isn't it?

but if they won't do it, then i will.  (since i've never been off the
bandwagon ;^)

the 49ers have the best active quarterback in the league.  they have the
best backup quarterback in the league.  they have the best quarterback of
all time ready to come off of IR.  they have perhaps the best pair of wide
receivers in the league.  perhaps the best receiving tight end as well.
they have one of the best offensive lines in the league.  they have perhaps
the best all-around fullback in the league.  and now they have a running
back that is not only decent, he is very good.  in short, they have the
best offense in the league.  and if yards and point totals don't impress
you, then just look at the most important stat of all: wins and losses.

okay, the pass rush has been weak and the secondary soft.  the special teams
often look like refugees from the special olympics.  the Saints are right
on their heels, and after the Rams they must face the Eagles, Dolphins,
and Vikings.  there is still quite a ways to go to make the playoffs, and
at this point it's just blowing smoke to say that any one team out of the
handfull of top ones is "the best".

but the 49ers have the momentum, and historically they have continued to
accelerate towards the end of the season.  and they have one asset that a
number of teams lack--they *know* they can win it.  and the other teams
know that too.  if you watched the Saints disintegrate last Sunday, saw
the shadow of doubt creep onto the field even after they were 13 points
up in the 4th quarter, then you know what i mean.

the niners are the team to beat.  the have never *stopped* being the team
to beat.  which is not to say that they're the best team, or that the won't
get beat.  two years ago the Giants beat 'em, and the Giants were the best
team in the league.  were the Giants the team to beat last year?  hardly.
the Redskins looked like the best team right from the get-go.  the 49ers
were still the team to beat.  and the Falcons beat 'em.  but a lot of folks,
not just niner fans, thought that the playoff game might well have been a
lot more interesting had the 49ers showed up to face the Redskins in place
of the Falcons.

that's not whining or woofing.  that's just looking at the teams under the
cool, clear light of reason.  ;^)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro