The 1988 49ers and their 6-5 start

[CSKreager]

Talk about a tale of two seasons for the '88 49ers.

They started 4-1, then lost 3 of 5, then reversed that and finished red-hot winning all their meaningful games (I know they lost 38-16 in the reg. season finale to the Rams, but they had nothing to gain/lose)

But before they got going on that roll to the Super Bowl in Walsh's last year..... how to explain that 6-5 start?

They only had 1 convincing win in their first 11 games- 38-7 at the Kingdome.

None of their other wins were by more than 7 points.

Week 1 at New Orleans- 34-33

Week 2 at NY Giants- Needed a Montana/Rice miracle pass to win 20-17

Week 5 vs. Detroit- Only beat a bad Lions team 20-13, a team they probably should have pounded

Week 7 at LA Rams- Roger Craig had a memorable game, but they only won by 3

Week 9 vs. Minnesota- THAT Steve Young run

Not only were they squeaking wins out, but look at the teams they lost to: Falcons/Raiders/Broncos beat them at home! (None of those teams had a winning record)

Blew a big lead at Phoenix against the Cardinals

MNF at Chicago, did nothing offensively after an opening drive TD

It's like they went from 0 to 100.

They at times arguably like a fading champion, losing to teams they shouldn't lose to, like they had a Viking playoff hangover loss.

And then suddenly it changed.

But before the turnaround, how do you explain that shaky start?

[74_75_78_79_]

Hangover from last year’s shocker to Vikings has to be the chief explanation. Once that loss at Phoenix was out the way, SF instantly became the team they would be for those next 2+yrs - ending, of course, with that loss to G-men in ’90 NFCCG. Acquiring Steve Young was such a vital move! It helped light that fire under Joe which led to those peak performances.

[Some Guy From Mars]

Could it be a scenario somewhat similar to the 2005 Steelers, whom started 7-5 before rounding into form and then running the table? It could be said that both teams peaked at the right time over the final half of the season.

[conace21]

Montana may have been affected by Walsh's preseason declaration that the 49ers had a quarterback controversy. He was certainly up and down at the start of the season, and had the worst 4-5 game stretch of his peak seasons (1987-1990.) Young wasn't much better in 1988, but he certainly produced one of the iconic moments of his career with the run against Minnesota.

[BD Sullivan]

John Taylor was suspended for the first four games because of a second failed drug test.

Montana re-injured his elbow in the opener, but the first half of the season was a Montana vs. Young debate

Walsh started Young against the Giants and he got sacked three times in the first half, holding onto the ball too long.

Against the Lions, they focused on their running game, with the Lions cutting the final margin to seven with just under five minutes left.

Facing the Rams, Roger Craig ran for 190 yards because Montana still had elbow problems and also had to get shot up for rib problems.

[rhickok1109]

I've always been a bit skeptical about over-emphasizing "psychological" factors in evaluating player and team performance, and this thread illustrates the dangers.

One poster suggests that signing Young lit a fire under Montana that led to some of his best performances and another feels that Montana's play wasn't up to par because he was negatively affected by the acquisition of Young.