The San Francisco 49ers went to Melbourne, Australia, and beat the Los Angeles Rams 27-7 on Thursday. The 49ers were three-point underdogs, but the Rams were being seen as the darlings of the NFL.
I think ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith said it bestthe next day when asked if the media overhyped the Los Angeles Rams: “It appears so.”
If you’re like me, you like to point out when people are wrong—especially when it’s bad predictions on the 49ers or their rivals. In this case, things were leaning heavily toward
the Rams and the “super team” they built. Then the 49ers went to Melbourne, Australia, and beat them 27-7. And for a Week 1 game, it wasn’t very sloppy either.
Now don’t get too excited. This was Week 1. I’m the first to tell you never to take stock in Week 1 games because it’s almost a given that teams look sloppy and have rust to knock off. The thing is, the 49ers looked really good. Not sloppy-play, good, but just good. Sure, it’s Week 1, and the 49ers could come back to earth next week, but it’s the Rams, and I can’t help myself.
So let’s be petty and make fun of some bad takes made before the game while we have time!
Bill Plaschke: “Rams will go undefeated on their way to winning another home Super Bowl title”
We had a couple of those “Rams are running the table” takes going around, but none got more notorious than the Los Angeles Times’ Bill Plaschke and his column on how the Rams are going to go 17-0.
I’m going to make a crazy take myself: I don’t think the Rams are running the table.
Plaschke went on to tell us this was a “Favorable schedule”. One where the Rams now have the New York Giants at home, then travel to both the Denver Broncos and Philadelphia Eagles. Then they have the Buffalo Bills. I guess you can say that’s “favorable.”
Plaschke hasn’t responded on X as of this writing, besides his recent column in the LA Times about the game being a “jet-lagged flop.”
Nick Wright: “I think the Niners defense could be really bad”
Most of the time when Wright makes a take, you can easily prove it wrong within five minutes, like his statement that you need first-rounders as skill-position players. I’m not going to say he’s wrong in being skeptical of the defense, but “really bad” is the exact opposite of what actually happened.
Like many of you, I had questions about Raheem Morris as defensive coordinator—and still do. Unlike many of you, when I saw Nick Sorensen as defensive coordinator in Week 1 of 2024, I grew optimistic immediately and had high expectations.
Well, I’m doing the same thing and having big expectations with Morris. That defense was nothing short of impressive, and this is without Mykel Williams, which should be a nice shot in the arm when he gets back. The 49ers didn’t get a sack, but they did get eight quarterback hits (four of which came from Osa Odighizuwa). The result was a flustered Matthew Stafford throwing a pick to Renardo Green.
If you think that’s good, remember that’s eight hits in one game. The 49ers had 58 all of 2025. That’s an average of under four per game. That, my friends, is improvement.
Oh, while we’re on the subject: the Rams didn’t have Aaron Donald, but they did have Myles Garrett. Well, kinda. The Rams had zero (0) sacks and two (2) quarterback hits. That zero is also what shows up for Garrett’s stat sheet. That’s some 2025 49ers defense if I ever saw it. This is a 49ers offensive line we’ve all been questioning this offseason, and they got to Purdy twice? Week 1 or Week 15, that’s not good. Congrats on your interception, though.
Louis Riddick: “I think there is a significant gap between the two”
Riddick was quick to say the roster of the 49ers was a good group, except it was dependent on a fully healthy Trent Williams, Christian McCaffrey, Nick Bosa, and Fred Warner.
After that list, he went on to say those are “aging guys—well, besides Fred Warner, obviously.”
Well, sure, those are aging guys, but if Fred Warner is not an aging guy, how in the hell is Nick Bosa, a player taken a year later, an “aging” guy? Yes, the 49ers have an older roster, and yes, Bosa has his injury concerns, but aging doesn’t seem like the right word here.
To be fair to Riddick, his take came from evaluating the roster’s health by Week 1 and showing the Rams had little issue with health while the 49ers were still working players like George Kittle back. There’s some substance to that, and I can’t disagree. That said, the gap isn’t nearly as significant as we’re led to believe.
A week ago, Riddick shared concerns about the roster.
This moron from Niners Nation: “I think the Rams win this one. As per usual, this game is going to be competitive as ever.”
Let’s really twist the knife on the rhetoric spewed by this guy:
As for a winner, I think the Rams win this one. As per usual, this game is going to be competitive as ever and will come down to the wire, as these games usually do. We’ll get the usual offensive showcase between Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan, but the Rams win and thank Australia for giving them an easier field.
Yes, me. I was an idiot. I said there would be an offensive showcase, not a one-sided beatdown (minus a dumb Brock Purdy interception). I wouldn’t have been surprised had the 49ers won that game, but I certainly didn’t see that happening. Logically, I thought they would come up short.
And this is what I get for thinking. Competitive? You mean benching Matthew Stafford with under two minutes left was competitive? I mean, didn’t you hear the announcer? They said the Rams had an opportunity with two timeouts and Eddy Piñeiro missing his field goal. So there was hope!
In any case, I’ll add my bad take to this list. What are your bad takes on the game that you had to sit through all of August and September? Put them in the comments below.
