If we lose Harvin are we still the favorite to win the NFC?

[TwistedHusky]

It stands to reason that with a phenomenal QB and a new veteran WR that was damn near an MVP at one point, combined with everything we already have, that we would be a reasonable pick to win the NFC and maybe the SB. So with the possibility of losing Harvin for half the season (if not more) does that change?

I think it does.

Remember the 49ers were actually in the SB last year. They already have accomplished a great deal. They have already gotten better, with additions to their secondary which was the weakness they had. They lost a key weapon, but did recently get a few potentially promising WRs back and I think that combined with the help to their secondary the loss of their best WR is probably a wash. They probably score less but give up less scores too. It also makes their pass rush more dangerous and it was frightening already. Adding to that, they also have more favorable scheduling than we do.

However, I don't think we are that far behind them. And one rule in life is generally that nothing is ever as good as you hope or as bad as you fear.

I think we can beat San Francisco in their house and I think we might have to in the playoffs. But on paper I have to give the edge to SF on this one.

 

[Missing_Clink]

I think Harvin put us over the top of great teams like the 49ers and Falcons. We are still right up there with a talent rich roster, but we also have probably the toughest schedule of top contenders. So I don't know...it obviously hurts though!

 

[Cartire]

God I hate this thread.

42>13

Without Harvin.

/thread

 

[mikeak]

Yes

 

[onanygivensunday]

The other reality is our lack of depth at TE.

Hopefully, Willson or McGrath or someone else steps up and Miller is good to go during the regular season.

 

[TwistedHusky]

42 > 13 was with last year's secondary.

You don't think that adding 2 above average corners changes things?

Considering that even then they went farther in the playoffs and we had a schedule that was much more favorable to us?

Or are you just penciling in a season with no losses whatsoever at the CLink even when that would defy probability and history?

I still think we can beat them, but just on paper I think they have the edge.

 

[m0ng0]

no, we are done

 

[Hawkpower]

42 > 13 was with last year's secondary.

You don't think that adding 2 above average corners changes things?

Considering that even then they went farther in the playoffs and we had a schedule that was much more favorable to us?

Or are you just penciling in a season with no losses whatsoever at the CLink even when that would defy probability and history?

I still think we can beat them, but just on paper I think they have the edge.

Pretty sure we upgraded more than just Harvin to our roster as well.

You cant just cherry pick the 49ers additions and pretend we only added Percy.

 

[MagHawk]

Would rather not be the favorites!

 

[Hawks46]

If Wilson progresses, it masks stuff like losing Harvin and having young, unproven TEs. Look at Brady, pretty much every year: he throws to a bunch of nobodies and is one of the best QBs in the league, year in and year out. When he ended up getting Moss (who packed it in in Oakland, people had considered his career almost over) he went out and set records. When Moss left NE, he was nobody again. The Pats still went to the SB after that, but they weren't setting records with an epic offense.

Same with P. Manning. Look at all his WRs when they leave; they don't do a whole lot. The elite QBs make other players better, then can make their OL look better as well.

Without Harvin, we were still setting records at the end of last year. With an entire offseason of 1st team reps to work with his WR and TE corps, I think Wilson can make other people step up and look better. Harvin would've put us over the top to where we might've been breaking records, but we didn't need that. It just makes the margin of error a bit smaller, and someone else has to step up.

If Miller comes back healthy, he had a good repoire with Wilson at the end of the year. Rice and Tate were hurting people, and Baldwin was taking advantage of starting nickle db's all across the league. Defenses already couldn't account for Lynch, Rice, Tate, and Baldwin, which was why Miller started really going off at the end of the year. If Wilson can put it all together, we already have a team that can win it all.

Also, look at progression. Aside from our draft picks, you have Wilson who should progress, Sweezy should progress, Turbin will probably progress even more...that is improvement right there. Tate looks like he could even get better, I honestly don't believe he's hit his ceiling. Just right there we make up for Harvin.

 

[hawker84]

The other reality is our lack of depth at TE.

Hopefully, Willson or McGrath or someone else steps up and Miller is good to go during the regular season.

much more concerned about this and our ? marks at D line and linebacker.. Will the new aquisitions pan out, and how will Irvin do in his new roll. Is Miller going to be healthy, and who will be our back up TE.

those are my concerns at this point.

To answer the OP's questions, Yes we're still good enough to compete with anyone anywhere. And better than most.

 

[sutz]

Perhaps the question should be:

Would losing Harvin (it's still not determined if we will) hurt our offense more than losing Crabtree hurts the 9ers?

I'd say no, and the balance of the other acquisitions in the offseason still leans in our favor.

:179417:

 

[volsunghawk]

42 > 13 was with last year's secondary.

You don't think that adding 2 above average corners changes things?

42-13 was also with last year's Seahawk pass rush. You don't think that adding 2 well above average D-linemen changes things?

 

[Anonymous]

Yes

You stole my answer Mike.

 

[rideaducati]

42 > 13 was with last year's secondary.

You don't think that adding 2 above average corners changes things?

Considering that even then they went farther in the playoffs and we had a schedule that was much more favorable to us?

Or are you just penciling in a season with no losses whatsoever at the CLink even when that would defy probability and history?

I still think we can beat them, but just on paper I think they have the edge.

I guess I missed the two above average corners they signed. I thought they brought in Asomugha but he hasn't been above average for several years now.

They also lost their best secondary player to Tampa and are replacing him with either a rookie or Dahl.

They are now going to rely on rookies for D line depth.

Advantage Seahawks.

 

[12thMan1]

no, we are done

Agreed

 

[Alkasquawlik]

42 > 13 was with last year's secondary.

You don't think that adding 2 above average corners changes things?

Considering that even then they went farther in the playoffs and we had a schedule that was much more favorable to us?

Or are you just penciling in a season with no losses whatsoever at the CLink even when that would defy probability and history?

I still think we can beat them, but just on paper I think they have the edge.

I guess I missed the two above average corners they signed. I thought they brought in Asomugha but he hasn't been above average for several years now.

They also lost their best secondary player to Tampa and are replacing him with either a rookie or Dahl.

They are now going to rely on rookies for D line depth.

Advantage Seahawks.

I wasn't aware Glenn Dorsey was a rookie.

 

[hawker84]

I too am interested in hearing about their 2 above average corners they just signed? They have 2 decent corners in brown and Asomugha, who else do they have? Whitner is good at run support but horrible in coverage, Culiver? overrated.. and like the poster above suggested, many questions at FS.. Reed has talent, but he's a rookie, it's going to take him a while to learn the NFL, Dahl? please.. they have huge question marks on offense and defense, many more than us.. i like how we stack up as of right now.. i give us a slight edge at this point.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

Harvin was considered an upgrade. Losing him is not a downgrade.

Also, while I was excited by the Harvin acquisition, paying so much for him had me scratching my head. Baldwin had a better rookie year than any season Harvin has ever posted. Tate is on par with Harvin per FO. Rice was at one time miles ahead of anything Harvin has ever done. Our WR corps was definitely upgraded, but mostly because he fills holes with our health concerns. Being as he was always a health concern himself, it felt like we overpaid for him.

So no, losing Harvin isn't the end of the world IMO. Our toughest setback this year has always been the crap schedule they gave us. It's a schedule that has 10-6 written all over it and we have to surpass the schedule to win this division. We're the better team, but the Niners could still take the division based on the schedule alone. Last year I said if we split with the Niners, we'd win the division based upon our schedule. A tie to the Rams was all that kept that from becoming reality. This year, we have to sweep them and win more east coast 10AM games than can reasonably be expected to win our division. Either way, with or without Harvin, we're a playoff team.

 

[FlyingGreg]

42 > 13 was with last year's secondary.

You don't think that adding 2 above average corners changes things?

Considering that even then they went farther in the playoffs and we had a schedule that was much more favorable to us?

Or are you just penciling in a season with no losses whatsoever at the CLink even when that would defy probability and history?

I still think we can beat them, but just on paper I think they have the edge.

I guess I missed the two above average corners they signed. I thought they brought in Asomugha but he hasn't been above average for several years now.

They also lost their best secondary player to Tampa and are replacing him with either a rookie or Dahl.

They are now going to rely on rookies for D line depth.

Advantage Seahawks.

I wasn't aware Glenn Dorsey was a rookie.

He's not a rookie, he just sucks.