From: GC.SUL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Niners Beat Aints, Refs
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 00:58:41 GMT

In article <BvCqq9.47I@news.orst.edu>,
curt@oce.orst.edu (Curt Vandetta) writes:
>
>In article <z5_p5vj.mzimmers@netcom.com> mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep28.191955.15422@cs.tulane.edu> buckley@cs.tulane.edu (James Buckley) writes:
>>
>>>Remember, the 49ers have to play the Saints one more time this year.
>>>So I wouldn't get all "high and mighty" just yet ...
>>
>>Especially if the officiating is as choice for that game as it was
>>for last night's.  Even the best teams can't consistently come up
>>through *that*.
>
> I won't argue that the Rice Fumble was a bad call.  It should have been ruled

This is a BIG BAD call though.  the Saints drove to score on that
possession.  I think a first 49er score would have changed the
complexion of the game, kept the crowd out of it more.  That had to
be an emotional letdown to have done such a great job on the opening
drive then have it ripped off from you.  Hebert can not play from
behind, but they do well from the lead or where they just need to
get a FG out of Anderson.  Hebert would have made the Niner
secondary look a lot better than they already did if he were in the
hole all game.

> down by contact with the spot of the ball on the 1/2 yard line, since that
> is where the ball was when his knees were down.  But other than that one
> call the Refs did all right.

No, they clearly blew the call that became the Watters fumble.  That
didn't have to be looked at very carefully to see.  The rest were
close enough.  I didn't like the PI call on Davis, but that's a huge
bias on my part. It could be argued that the refs made a bad
call with the holding call on the Saints last drive.  Why is it they
don't call it all game then wait until the last minute?  That was
surprising since I am so used to seeing it go against the Niners.

> If I was a 49'er fan (and that's a big IF) I would be more concerned about
> the offensive line play than the Refs.  The Saints were putting a lot of

I am and I'm not.  The O line had an outstanding game against an
outstanding D and they were at the disadvantage because of the crowd
noise.  No matter how good a line you have, Saints are going to get
pressure on your passing game, and especially the Niners who they
know so well.  They had a very good running attack, held Saints to
one sack.  I won't trade for another thank you.

> presure on Young from the outside (OLB's rushing to be more specific) a
> less mobile QB than Young, like Montana for example, would have been sacked
> quite a few times.  If your looking for a reason why they didn't perform
> at various points of the game, that is why.  Young was constantly having
> to step up and scrabble up the middle.  It also appeared to me, but the


> camera view you get from TV makes it hard to know for sure, that Rice was
> doing a very poor job of coming back to Young when Young was in trouble.
> Perhaps he was starting to block when Young was scrambling around, but it
> didn't appear that they were working together very well.

Rice admitted that in the papers this week, that he is running wrong
routes.  He is also frustrated at the shots he's taking away from
the ball.  They will connect for sure.

>
> It looks like the Saints might have found a weakness in the San Francisco
> offense.  Presure Young hard from the outside, force him to scrabble up
> the middle and try to contain him with an inside LB playing the middle

The Saints have always been able to keep Niner offensive output in
the mid-teens, this is nothing new.
>
> The Saints remind me a lot of Philadelphia last year.  A Great D, but no
> O, only the Eagles had an excuse!

c'mon, the Eagles had better 2 and 3 QB than Hebert.

Mike