Expectations for the 2013 season?

Point #1: Totally agree about the offense.

Point #2: I think the defense holds steady this year. That might not be enough to take the #1 scoring position again, but then again, who's going to take the crown from us? See Point 3

Point #3: The 49ers defense has a far greater chance of regressing than we do. While Kaepernick should do enough to keep their defense off the field, they're also going to be playing a lot of slim margin games and frankly, their defense trended downwards last season, and unless their draft picks pan out huge, they got weaker in the secondary which was already 'deficient'. If Seattle is going to be known for offense, that's going to go double for the 49ers, but I think they'll end up like the Packers. It's all on the QB.

Point #4: Wilson isn't far enough along in the public eye to win MVP. He'll probably be worthy of consideration, and he probably should win it, but if Peyton Manning or Tom Brady have good seasons again, they'll get the nod by default. It's stupid, but the sportswriters are stupid. However, Super Bowl MVP is definitely in the cards.

Point #5: The sportswriters will also probably give the nod to someone else over Schneider. Again, because they're stupid. It won't matter. Seattle extended Schneider, and he's primed for a dynastic run which is more important.

RolandDeschain":3leywptj said:

You didn't see the 49ers of the 80s and early 90s losing a bunch of road games.

Click to expand...

These teams were an outlier. When you have multiple Hall of Fame players all playing in their primes -- along with a generous helping of marginal pro bowl mates -- you're going to be successful anywhere. Those teams were great defensively. That gets lost in the WCO/finesse legacy. But those teams also dominated with the run and by being a top 5 defense year in and year out.

If anything, adding the niners of that era only supports the notion that teams that can play physical and tough tend to buck the 10am start trend. You don't need to be as precise and finely tuned to physically maul your opponent.

Attyla the Hawk":2l4ot5zc said:

These teams were an outlier.

Click to expand...

Fine. Go look up the road/home loss numbers for some east coast team that was mediocre for a long period of time, and let's see if there is a clearly definable trend. FYI, Football Outsiders determined that almost every NFL team has an 8.5% home advantage, so it would have to be a swing noticeably larger than that for it to be an outlier potentially attributable to time zone change/jet lag.

Attyla the Hawk":10xsgjky said:

Additionally, I believe the style of play factors into that. Teams whose success is largely predicated on precision, timing and tempo seem to be more affected than teams who thrive in playing physically.

Click to expand...

I agree with this thought. This team is light years ahead of past teams in terms of style of play. No more finesse, all kick-ass fueled by urine and sour wine.

I think folks here hung up on these long-distance road games in the early timeslot need to realize, also, that three hours later in the day might be counterproductive to a team that thrives on physicality. Reason? Let's say that you are a go-get-'em type, like an Earl Thomas, who is literally chomping at the bit to get on the field and tackle somebody. You are going to be pacing around in a froth for an extra three hours when you could be using that energy against the opponent in the now. How much energy is expelled with another three hours of waiting? I guarantee you Earl is up at about 6:00am already preparing himself to play.

I'll be the first to admit that I am by no means an expert on sports science or the physiology of an athlete's body. I can only speak from experience, and say that whenever I look back at my most physically productive sector of time within a given work day, the mid-day time-slot finds me getting the most stuff done in an efficient manner and with the least amount fatigue slowing me down. In the late afternoon (and especially after lunch) I want to take a nap. Sure, I'm pushing 50, but this has been true since my early 20's. I've always been a full-throttle guy who gets stuff done early then hits cruise control in the heat of the afternoon. I say the players are the same way or they don't make this team in the first place. It doesn't take me the better part of a day to get ready for anything and I doubt PC and JS will tolerate a guy who needs to warm his motor up for 7 hours before selecting "D" on the shifter.

Again, I think the real issue this team faces on the road is at what point the crowd noise is heard, and that is about it. With big Russ calling the signals, we're good. As Kip eluded to, this offense will have ZERO trouble operating this year. And the defense? Well, it'll be all quiet out on those fields enabling much better communication.

In fact, I'm going on record right now; the defense will play better on the road than they will at home.

Sarlacc83":33xgyszo said:

Point #1: Totally agree about the offense.

Point #2: I think the defense holds steady this year. That might not be enough to take the #1 scoring position again, but then again, who's going to take the crown from us? See Point 3

Point #3: The 49ers defense has a far greater chance of regressing than we do. While Kaepernick should do enough to keep their defense off the field, they're also going to be playing a lot of slim margin games and frankly, their defense trended downwards last season, and unless their draft picks pan out huge, they got weaker in the secondary which was already 'deficient'. If Seattle is going to be known for offense, that's going to go double for the 49ers, but I think they'll end up like the Packers. It's all on the QB.

Point #4: Wilson isn't far enough along in the public eye to win MVP. He'll probably be worthy of consideration, and he probably should win it, but if Peyton Manning or Tom Brady have good seasons again, they'll get the nod by default. It's stupid, but the sportswriters are stupid. However, Super Bowl MVP is definitely in the cards.

Point #5: The sportswriters will also probably give the nod to someone else over Schneider. Again, because they're stupid. It won't matter. Seattle extended Schneider, and he's primed for a dynastic run which is more important.

Click to expand...

Sarlacc, whatever you had for breakfast today, have it again tomorrow.

Good stuff.

kearly":283ia0ev said:

When I look at Seattle's offense, it's not really that they have the most elite collection of weapons ever assembled, it's just that they have a group of very good players that can all make defenders pay for not respecting them. And you can't cover every base. Not with just 11 defenders. Defenses will be stretched more than ever in 2013 when facing the Seahawks.

Click to expand...

This reminds me of the Herb Brooks quote from Miracle:

"I'm not looking for the best players... I'm looking for the right ones."

For our offense, the collection of receivers and RBs is a formidable team, though Harvin and Lynch may be the only perennial probowlers talent-wise at this point (we've yet to see what Michael brings, and to what degree Tate steps up).

Here are mine:

1st) Top 5 Offense and Defense in the NFL.
2nd) Lead the league in Rushing.
3rd) Win at least 6 games on the road.
4th) Win the division.

At least a 5-3 road record. If we can get that on the road, I would be ecstatic. No more "Cant win on the Road" speeches.

I think every road game for every team is tough. On our schedule, SF, HOU, ATL, and even NY are all very feasible losses. If we snatch one of those, Ill be happy. Hell, even CAR is a tough one, especially for a season opener on the road. But if we can manage to put away AZ, ST.L, IND (like we should) and grab two more wins out of the other 5, I will be so so happy.

I'm not going line item by line item, but this is what I see happening for the most part.

Offense, if and big if the line holds up and improves we are finally at the stage of USC as far as how we run the offense. Big depth at RB, a stable of receivers, they don't have to be all pro just be able to catch the ball and be hard to defend. We have height, speed, versatility, RAC and toughness. We have type player in Harvin that can line up anywhere, possession guys in Baldwin and Tate, Rice for the height and down feild as well as Harvin. Miller to split the seams and under routes, Willson if he pans out a a tall end zone threat that may also be a sort of Mile Williams guy on the sidelines.

It will be more of we don't need to trick you or anything, here is whats coming now try to stop it type offense with a master of orchestration conducting it in Russell Wilson.

On defense we have attitude, physical presence, and a lot of the body types we have been trying to assemble for a long time. I think if the offense generates points quickly we may see a very aggressive defense, not the bend but don't break attitude of the past, not the play prevent defense that costs us wins. I think with Quinn especially we become rabid dogs and take a few chances at making pics and creating even more turnovers, blitzing on first down when the other team is behind stuff, rotating coverage to make things look like a miss match and have guys go for pick offs. The kind of things that rip a opponents heart out and then add insult to injury as they see you eat that same heart.

Thats what I see us trying to do, it all adds up to controlling our own destiny and not giving anything back or leaving any doubt as to who wins in any games we play.

The Seahawks actually have a really good chance to put the 10am problem behind them in 2013, since the early start / body clock issue typically effects defense much more than offense. If Seattle is the kind of team I think they'll be, where they are being carried more by their offense (similar to the Patriots), then I could see them doing much better in 10am starts. If Seattle went 5-0 in 10am starts, I wouldn't be shocked, because that's how good their offense can be.

That said, the 10am disadvantage is not a secret and it's not subtle. Athletic performance peaks around 4pm, and that's not something that gets reset for timezone change in 24 or 48 hours. If anyone thinks we lose the Atlanta game if it starts at 1pm Pacific, I think you're nuts. The first half of that game screamed body clock issues. The 49ers had the same problem the next week (though their game started at 11am). Of course, no one is saying that 10am start = automatic loss. It's just an extra disadvantage to deal with, and it will probably turn one or two close wins into close losses next season.

Seattle's winning percentage in 10am Pacific starts under Pete Carroll is close to the 10 year NFL average cited by Barthawk. Maybe Pete builds a team so good on offense that he can be an exception this year, but the proof is in the pudding.

As far as the Rams, why should we be worried about them? They are not a 10 win team. They are like Minnesota without AP. As long as Bradford is there, they will be mediocre. They remind me a lot of the John Friesz-era Seahawks. They are more of a pest than a good team, IMO.

10am start times matter. The evidence is ridiculously large. I've always been most likely to PR on my lifts in the afternoon, but that's just an anecdote. Research-wise, there are numerous studies demonstrating that the afternoon is when the human body reaches peak strength and coordination, as much as a 5-7% increase over the morning. That's like playing against a team on steroids.

Aside from the physiological data, the empirical data is hard to ignore:

Sando":5jowe30w said:

In the Seahawks' case, they've been outscored by 4.6 points per game in the first halves of 10 a.m. PT kickoffs since 2001, according to ESPN Stats & Information. The deficit was 2.1 points per game in first halves of road games kicking off between 1 p.m. PT and 1:25 p.m. PT.

Click to expand...

[source: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/ ... r-seahawks ]

Formido, psychosomatic effects are still effects, even if they are fake; just like placebos in medicine can still actually help in some things.

That doesn't prove legitimacy, though.

Also, the Seahawks won 35.8% of their 10am games compared to 38.8% of 1pm road games. That's a rather small statistical deviation.

kearly":2ctn2j1o said:

As far as the Rams, why should we be worried about them? They are not a 10 win team. They are like Minnesota without AP. As long as Bradford is there, they will be mediocre. They remind me a lot of the John Friesz-era Seahawks. They are more of a pest than a good team, IMO.

Click to expand...

That's the way I feel about the Rams, of course, feel free to disagree. Maybe the Seahawk rise last year looked clear to us, but for the rest of the league we were supposed to be an easy out. Only takes a few players to finally "get it" to pull off a surprising season. I used to hold pre-Harbaugh Alex Smith in lower regard then I do Sam Bradford at this moment.

1. 12+ wins
2. NFCW Champs
3. 5-1 or 6-0 division record.
4. Superbowl appearance.
5. 30+ TDs, less than 10 INTs for Wilson.

kearly":hf8yufba said:

As far as the Rams, why should we be worried about them? They are not a 10 win team. They are like Minnesota without AP. As long as Bradford is there, they will be mediocre. They remind me a lot of the John Friesz-era Seahawks. They are more of a pest than a good team, IMO.

Click to expand...

Their defensive line is worth about six wins all by itself. If Bradford can simply not cause any more losses than he causes wins, an improved secondary and a good #1 receiver could push them into 9-10 win territory.

You might think I'm being facetious, but I'm not.

RolandDeschain":vmr4eij0 said:

Formido, psychosomatic effects are still effects, even if they are fake; just like placebos in medicine can still actually help in some things.

That doesn't prove legitimacy, though.

Also, the Seahawks won 35.8% of their 10am games compared to 38.8% of 1pm road games. That's a rather small statistical deviation.

Click to expand...

Your bodies thermogenic peak has nothing to do with psychosomatics. Thats proven.

Sando also had another article that took all the west coast teams, SEA, SF, OAK, SD, AZ and ran the data. It showed pretty well how teams traveling to the east coast and playing in 10am games were at a huge disadvantage compared to any other start time.

No one is arguing that teams CANT win at 10am from the west. But the disadvantage is documented quite well.

Dude, I just pointed out from your own Sando link that the difference in losses at 10am starts compared to 1am starts is exactly 3.0%. That is a very minor deviation. What kind of crack are you smoking?

Cartire":udcr5flg said:

Your bodies thermogenic peak has nothing to do with psychosomatics. Thats proven.

Click to expand...

Uh, no. Find me some evidence that this would be practically the only physically exempt thing in the human body that CANNOT be influenced by the subconscious mind. Our minds can change virtually anything in our body, under the right circumstances; like scars fading and appearing, and eye color changing (in seconds) on someone with dissociative identity disorder when they switch personalities, in some very rare cases.

If our offense is as efficient this year as it was the second half of last year I have a hard time seeing our defense regressing. Opposing teams will have fewer opportunities to score and or D will be more rested. On top of that, the bigger lead we have the more opponents will pass, likely resulting in more turnovers.

RolandDeschain":2x2lh7wl said:

Dude, I just pointed out from your own Sando link that the difference in losses at 10am starts compared to 1am starts is exactly 3.0%. That is a very minor deviation. What kind of crack are you smoking?

Click to expand...

not my link buddy. But I was talking about west coast teams as a whole since were talking about west coast to east coast 10 am games. You have to include all of them and not just Seattle or else your not getting all the stats.

Do you even know how to do basic math? Ok, on that pic you just posted, San Diego has a BETTER winning percentage at 10am than they do at 1pm. 46.9% of 10am games were wins, compared to 45.7% of 1pm games being wins. SF and Oakland are more serious outliers, but a tiny difference for the Seahawks and the Chargers winning MORE at 10am pretty much blow it right out of the water as far as "proof" goes.

SF: 28.3% at 10am, 52.6% at 1pm.
Oakland: 27.7% at 10am, 37.0% at 1pm.
Arizona: 25.8% at 10am, 32.2% at 1pm.

Notice the only 3 that had noticeable discrepancies are also teams that sucked for almost every single one of the years in question, too.

Believe what you want.