Originally Posted by 505 Chief (Post 10820465)

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 10819617)

When you lose as consistently in the playoffs as Marty did, there's more than luck involved.

Playing not to lose leads ultimately to losing.

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 10820453)

**** all this knowing the situation bullshit.

If you've got a guy wide open, you throw him the ****ing ball. More points=a good ****ing thing.

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 10820887)

Martyocrity.

Originally Posted by temper11 (Post 10820893)

You guys call it Martyocrity here in KC. We call it the west coast offense pioneered by Bill Walsh. Niners won a few superbowls with it. Maybe it's dated and doesn't belong in today's NFL - But I still believe in it.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 10820913)

Marty's WCO, led by Paul Hackett, wasn't exactly Walsh's offense but it was close. The difference was that the 49ers had real WRs and the Chiefs, as they have most of the time I've been a fan, had shit WRs.

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 10820939)

The 49ers also had real quarterbacks and allowed them to play without leashes - the Montana years here being the exception that proved the rule. Only then could Marty win despite himself. That's where the 'play not to lose' mantra came from.

What Marty could do is coach up an average roster to win regular season games. Put him in postseason situations against playoff rosters and he was toast.

Although if you go further beyond that and look at his years in SD, where he had an incredibly talented roster, you'll see he still found creative ways to **** up playoff games. Although then it was generally because he stopped doing the things that won them games during the regular season and reverted back to his tendencies. The same tendencies that led to 13-3 one-and-done's here.

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC (Post 10820099)

Was 95 the "Yards in Chunks" year or was that down the road... but I remember him saying he was going to have his offense get yards in "chunks"

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 10817817)

This is all bullshit.

Jenkins and Avery are both open by NFL standards.

Originally Posted by dls6501 (Post 10817953)

My biggest problem with Alex Smith is he does not maximize the potential of every play. There have been countless times every single game of his career that he has a WR open for what could be a big play, but Alex chooses to go to a safer play.

When a wide receiver is a step or two past his defender, Alex does not see this as the WR being open enough, and will go to a more open WR.....even if the latter WR will result in a minimal gain. Alex sees a WR that is one or two steps past his defender as a risky throw....where in actuality, said WR is wide open by NFL standards.

The Alex fans will say that "he plays within the circumstances of the game," but I would argue that aside from having a big lead late int the 4th Quarter, there is no circumstance of a game that would call for a QB to NOT throw to an open WR who is streaking down the field. While Alex is praised for finding an open dump off that will net 3 yards, I criticize him for missing the open WR who would net 25+ yards on the same play.

It has nothing to do with simply hoping he will bomb it every play. That is NOT what I or others are trying to say. You Alex fans say that one of his best traits is accuracy right? Well then if a WR is two steps past his defender, an accurate QB should have ZERO problem hitting him and shouldnt deem it as a "risky attempt."

Originally Posted by Kaepernick (Post 10824469)

Open by NFL standards is not open by Alex Smith standards. Alex wants clear, un-interceptible separation in order to throw to his wide receivers. That is just how Alex is. The upside is, he creates very few turnovers, which are the #1 reason for losses. So he is a net plus. Just not the type of QB to thread the needle to a WR to win a playoff game when it is on the line.