QB Competition

Does anybody get the feeling that the higher ups (McClueless) is pressuring Singletary to name Smith as the starter. Because it really makes no sense for Singletary to wait this long.

Personally I think we are screwed at QB. Smith is an epic fail and everybody knows it. Also I have a feeling that Hill is going to be exposed now that defenses have enough film on him.

I will say it again, I totally hate QB competitions in camp and preseason. Once again we should have just named Hill the starter from day one and see if Alex could unseat him. Jimmy Raye wanted it that way, it helps the starters to continue to build the continuity and sets everything in place.

Why all the bickering about who looks better in preseason? It's hard to gauge both Shaun and Alex when neither one has played with a full starting 11.

No Gore (extended play)
No Bruce (extended play)
No Baas
Limited amount of plays
Lots of hand offs

Preseason is to see what we have in rookies. I think everyone knows what we have in Smith and Hill.

Originally posted by BETTERDAYZ9ERS:
I will say it again, I totally hate QB competitions in camp and preseason. Once again we should have just named Hill the starter from day one and see if Alex could unseat him. Jimmy Raye wanted it that way, it helps the starters to continue to build the continuity and sets everything in place.

Why all the bickering about who looks better in preseason? It's hard to gauge both Shaun and Alex when neither one has played with a full starting 11.

No Gore (extended play)
No Bruce (extended play)
No Baas
Limited amount of plays
Lots of hand offs

Preseason is to see what we have in rookies. I think everyone knows what we have in Smith and Hill.

I won't get involved in a lot of bickering about Singletary, but this issue of "naming" the starting QB is why I do not like a defensive coach as HC - they just do not have the proper "feel" for how important the position of QB is to the team.

The HC and starting QB must be joined at the hip if the offense is to run smoothly. That doesn't preclude a defensive coach from having a good offense, just that it puts one more hurdle in the path of offensive success.

We must remember, MS came from a championship Chicago team that had Jim McMahon as the starter for much of Singletary's time there. The team won by running the ball and playing great defense.

It if further interesting to note, that franchise has continued to struggle for lack of quality play at QB ever since. (No, I don't think Cutler is the answer but that is for another thread)

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:
Jesus, will all you Smith apologetics get REAL for once ? Is it sheer coincidence that EVERYTIME Smith is our QB, the "drops" and "miscues" by our receivers increase ? Did it ever occur to you people that Alex Smith is too slow in his reads, and that by the time he throws to his receivers, they're way past running their routes and are circling the field like chickens with their heads cut off. Yeah, if I ran a 5 yard outpattern, didnt have my QB throw to me......Id be running like a maniac too around all those defenders. Which would definitely skew my attention level to a point where I might not be concentrating on the ball too well.

Seriously, some of you guys need to wake up. Why dont you go back and pull out ALL your posts from Webzone archives that state "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball". It's freaking hilarious, cause this "problem" only exists with Smith in. And please, dont even bother to try and convince us realists that Alex Smith has an arm like Favre's, and his receivers cant see the ball.

The truth: Alex doesnt do a good job reading through his progressions. When he does, he throws a bad ball. When he doesnt, he forces his receivers into unconventional positions. No s**t they keep dropping balls.

Im not saying Hill is Montana reincarnate. But he sure as hell has better command of the field than Smith has. And Id rather put the ball in his hands on 3rd and 21, than give Smith a shot on 3rd and 5.

If Alex is slow in his progressions... and sometimes he is... that is no excuse for receivers to drop catchable passes. Ball comes your way? You catch it, or you sit the bench. The only thing rediculous is this desparation by some to discredit Alex Smith. There are things that he needs to do better... ball placement and decision making... but that will come with time and comfort behind center.

Bottom line is catchable passes get caught... or it's on the receivers. They make too much coin for this pampered belief that the ball must be put perfectly placed.

For the record, Smith was NOT slow in his progressions agains the Raiders. The first pass to Davis was his second option and he put it right in stride. The only "bad" throw was the one that went through Morgan's hands for a pick. Though that was a ball a quality receiver should have caught, it is one that will get a receiver hammered while doing so. From a technical standpoint, this was the best game we have seen from Smith.

But again, all of this stuff will be decided on the field. Everyone has their POV but the facts are that Smith has NEVER had a quality position coach and even Steve Young, whose comments were posted somewhat out of context, would agree that until a player is shown and told what to do by someone who knows what they are talking about, it is impossible for them to have the entire package.


....and now back to your regular programming...

He wasn't slow -- but he also wasn't hitting his primary routes -- even though replays showed he had the room.

Go back and look at his progressions. He was hitting the second and third "safe" option every single time. Dink and dunk. It was the same Alex Smith I've seen since Day One. He simply lacks the confidence to zing the ball downfield.

To be honest? Really honest? I think Hill is a stopgap measure at best. The best QB on the roster at this point appears to be Nate Davis.

But he's nowhere near ready. In a year or two? Mebbe. Now? No.

I agree Hill is a stop-gap. He clearly does not have the arm strength to keep defenses honest for a season.

back to Smith, in looking at the replays, Smith had two plays where the primary receiver came open but at that moment, Smith had a d-lineman with his hands up that prevented him from going there.

I wasn't at this game so I can't comment more than what I have said here.

Originally posted by SF69ers:

Originally posted by Thrash88:
In a general conclusion if Hill does start I hope he performs better then he did on Saturday or we won't win any games. Point is as fans we should want the team to succeed and we have to admit both quarterbacks don't look that great and in that case the start would go to Hill and HOPEFULLY he turns it on during the season because we do have a good running game and defense but that quarterback can be the wild card. If he keeps turnovers down and moves the chains on third downs we could be a black horse :)!

From the looks of how our offense is during the preseason, Shaun Hill will be a much better game manager. We'll be running the ball a lot so we don't necessarily have to worry about Hill throwing the ball often. I like how you bring in the stats and how Hill hasn't beaten good teams. The Bucs had almost all their defensive starters in the game that year. The Jets were still in the playoff hunt, the Redskins, on paper, were a much better team than us, and the Bills are a difficult team to beat on the road, especially with our success rate on the road. The fact of the matter is this, Hill doesn't need to throw 50-70 yards down the field to be a good QB. What he does well, is he doesn't make many mistakes, he makes quick reads, and he is pretty accurate. He moves the chains and puts points on the board. You say you know football, and so do I and a lot of people on this site. The only thing that matters is the WIN. Shaun Hill is a winner.

With Hill at QB, the key to the passing game will be how well Hill can deal with teams that rotate linebackers back into the short-to-intermediate zones where Hill likes to go.

If I were a DC going against Hill, I would play bump-and-run on the outside - jam the wideouts so they could not get deep early, and then plug the short zones as above. I do not believe Hill can defeat a team that executes that kind of plan. In that case, Gore/Coffee better be able to run because the passing game will be nil. Worst part of that is the same strategy also puts more defenders on or near the LOS which will making the running game tough.

...play ball...

I do know football and when they played that great Buccaneers team. We were losing 13-6 at half when 3/4 of the Buccaneers starters came out.

"The Buccaneers (9-6) already are headed to the playoffs as the NFC's No. 4 seed, so Tampa Bay treated the day as a glorified exhibition, removing nearly every key player in the second half."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271223025

He then went on to beat a 5-9 Cincinnati team, quite impressive whose starting running back was non other then Rudi Johnson on the downside of his career and Kenny Watson. Wait who the heck is Kenny Watson, enough said.

As for last year, his impressive two wins against the Rams, not to mention that last game he threw 3 INT! Those 2-14 Rams sure must of been tough! He beat the Bills who were put to 6-6 after that game, awsome. I'll give him the Jets game that was a hell of a game all be it Favre wasn't exactly god last year.

You wanna talk about winning, again show me facts. Beating up on scrubs doesn't do it. If he could beat scrubs the last two years he shouldn't have any trouble this preseason as it's the same competition level, yet hes struggling. Not a good sign for niner fans!

I have to respectfully disagree with anyone who thinks Shuan Hill is out performing Alex Smith... Last year shouldn't matter. What matters is who's play well this year.

Smith looked decent in the first game and looked very sharp in this last game vs the Raiders. He looked like he had control.

Smith looked confidnet and threw the ball on the money. It's not his fault our recievers were dropping them.

BTW- I'll pull for either Smith or Hill. But come on... give credit where credit is due!

I'm not buying the "game manager" crap. I don't see many game managers in the playoffs. I see Eli Manning. I see Ben Roethlisberger. I see Phillip Rivers. I see Peyton Manning. I see Matt Ryan. I see the likes of Tony Romo, Tom Brady, Kerry Collins, Joe Flacco, and so on. THAT is what we need. When was the last time that type of QB's team had any success? Tampa Bay, a decade ago? Baltimore? I mean come on. Our team isn't built to have just a game manager of a QB. Our defense isn't a top 5 defense. Our special teams isn't a top 5 special teams unit. Our offense isn't a top 5 offense. So we should be happy that we have a game manager? For what? To manage the game until we lose in the final seconds?

This is the problem with the 49ers. Before, we had Montana, Young, and Garcia. We had the mentality of killing other teams, not managing the game until the 4th quarter and see what happens. I like Hill, but he is, in no way, an NFL starter for an average franchise (like us right now). Put him on a team with a top 5 defense and then you might have something.

I want Smith or Davis and I want to see them develop. If they don't work, let's get someone next year and end this BS. WHATEVER it takes. I'm trading next year's 2 1st round picks if I have to in order to get one.

Originally posted by mustangmele:
I have to respectfully disagree with anyone who thinks Shuan Hill is out performing Alex Smith... Last year shouldn't matter. What matter is this year.

Smith looked decent in the first game and looked very sharp in this last game vs the Raiders. He looked like he had control.

Smith looked confident and threw the ball on the money. It's not his fault our recievers were dropping them.

BTW- I'll pull for either Smith or Hill. But come on... give credit where credit is due!

Agreed, after watching that INT over and over on TVU it was a hard throw but right through his hands thrown right at his facemask. It's not exactly rocket science to realize that he should have held on, not to mention Morgan has admitted that the INT was his fault anyways. Nice hit by Smith to save the touchdown non the less and great goal line stand by the D!

Originally posted by Thrash88:
I do know football and when they played that great Buccaneers team. We were losing 13-6 at half when 3/4 of the Buccaneers starters came out.

"The Buccaneers (9-6) already are headed to the playoffs as the NFC's No. 4 seed, so Tampa Bay treated the day as a glorified exhibition, removing nearly every key player in the second half."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271223025

He then went on to beat a 5-9 Cincinnati team, quite impressive whose starting running back was non other then Rudi Johnson on the downside of his career and Kenny Watson. Wait who the heck is Kenny Watson, enough said.

As for last year, his impressive two wins against the Rams, not to mention that last game he threw 3 INT! Those 2-14 Rams sure must of been tough! He beat the Bills who were put to 6-6 after that game, awsome. I'll give him the Jets game that was a hell of a game all be it Favre wasn't exactly god last year.

You wanna talk about winning, again show me facts. Beating up on scrubs doesn't do it. If he could beat scrubs the last two years he shouldn't have any trouble this preseason as it's the same competition level, yet hes struggling. Not a good sign for niner fans!

Dude, nobody is saying Hill is the next Montana. People are just pointing out that in the 10 times he's started, he's won 7 of those games. Now, does he need to show that he can beat good/great times? Of course, every young QB who has ever played the game needs to do this. But you have to start somewhere...if over time he proves that he can't beat good teams, THEN your point becomes a valid one. However, 10 starts doesn't equal a trend either way (for or against his case to start).

Did Hill struggle against Denver in his 1 quarter of play? I didn't think so....he didn't look great, but he didn't play poorly either. He made some excellent throws, and he held on to the ball to long and took a sack. Overall, not a great performance, but definitely not a "struggle."

He did look bad against the Raiders, this is true. Even though Smith's numbers were worse, I thought he looked in command of the huddle and overall more confident than did Hill.

Is that one quarter alone enough for Smith to unseat Hill though? Not in my opinion.

The bigger issue is that we don't really have a TRUE QB on this team, or at least one that the fans feel has the right stuff to lead our team all the way. What we have is a collection of mediocrity, and the decision is really, "which one, out of these, will suck the least?"

Originally posted by Thrash88:
I do know football and when they played that great Buccaneers team. We were losing 13-6 at half when 3/4 of the Buccaneers starters came out.

"The Buccaneers (9-6) already are headed to the playoffs as the NFC's No. 4 seed, so Tampa Bay treated the day as a glorified exhibition, removing nearly every key player in the second half."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271223025

He then went on to beat a 5-9 Cincinnati team, quite impressive whose starting running back was non other then Rudi Johnson on the downside of his career and Kenny Watson. Wait who the heck is Kenny Watson, enough said.

As for last year, his impressive two wins against the Rams, not to mention that last game he threw 3 INT! Those 2-14 Rams sure must of been tough! He beat the Bills who were put to 6-6 after that game, awsome. I'll give him the Jets game that was a hell of a game all be it Favre wasn't exactly god last year.

You wanna talk about winning, again show me facts. Beating up on scrubs doesn't do it. If he could beat scrubs the last two years he shouldn't have any trouble this preseason as it's the same competition level, yet hes struggling. Not a good sign for niner fans!

So what was Hill supposed to do, say, "oh wait they're scrubs 2nd and 3rd stringers, I don't wanna play them??

Hill played who he had to play, he couldn't choose who his opponents were.

Originally posted by Thrash88:
I do know football and when they played that great Buccaneers team. We were losing 13-6 at half when 3/4 of the Buccaneers starters came out.

"The Buccaneers (9-6) already are headed to the playoffs as the NFC's No. 4 seed, so Tampa Bay treated the day as a glorified exhibition, removing nearly every key player in the second half."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271223025

He then went on to beat a 5-9 Cincinnati team, quite impressive whose starting running back was non other then Rudi Johnson on the downside of his career and Kenny Watson. Wait who the heck is Kenny Watson, enough said.

As for last year, his impressive two wins against the Rams, not to mention that last game he threw 3 INT! Those 2-14 Rams sure must of been tough! He beat the Bills who were put to 6-6 after that game, awsome. I'll give him the Jets game that was a hell of a game all be it Favre wasn't exactly god last year.

You wanna talk about winning, again show me facts. Beating up on scrubs doesn't do it. If he could beat scrubs the last two years he shouldn't have any trouble this preseason as it's the same competition level, yet hes struggling. Not a good sign for niner fans!

Your argument does not make sense. You are trying to qualify the opponents when that is not part of the question. Do you take away from the Patriots 18-0 record because they played some week opponents? (No, you take away from them because they cheated.) Do take away Pits Superbowl win because it was against the far inferior Cardinals?

Originally posted by GoFD74:

Originally posted by Thrash88:
I do know football and when they played that great Buccaneers team. We were losing 13-6 at half when 3/4 of the Buccaneers starters came out.

"The Buccaneers (9-6) already are headed to the playoffs as the NFC's No. 4 seed, so Tampa Bay treated the day as a glorified exhibition, removing nearly every key player in the second half."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=271223025

He then went on to beat a 5-9 Cincinnati team, quite impressive whose starting running back was non other then Rudi Johnson on the downside of his career and Kenny Watson. Wait who the heck is Kenny Watson, enough said.

As for last year, his impressive two wins against the Rams, not to mention that last game he threw 3 INT! Those 2-14 Rams sure must of been tough! He beat the Bills who were put to 6-6 after that game, awsome. I'll give him the Jets game that was a hell of a game all be it Favre wasn't exactly god last year.

You wanna talk about winning, again show me facts. Beating up on scrubs doesn't do it. If he could beat scrubs the last two years he shouldn't have any trouble this preseason as it's the same competition level, yet hes struggling. Not a good sign for niner fans!

Dude, nobody is saying Hill is the next Montana. People are just pointing out that in the 10 times he's started, he's won 7 of those games. Now, does he need to show that he can beat good/great times? Of course, every young QB who has ever played the game needs to do this. But you have to start somewhere...if over time he proves that he can't beat good teams, THEN your point becomes a valid one. However, 10 starts doesn't equal a trend either way (for or against his case to start).

Did Hill struggle against Denver in his 1 quarter of play? I didn't think so....he didn't look great, but he didn't play poorly either. He made some excellent throws, and he held on to the ball to long and took a sack. Overall, not a great performance, but definitely not a "struggle."

He did look bad against the Raiders, this is true. Even though Smith's numbers were worse, I thought he looked in command of the huddle and overall more confident than did Hill.

Is that one quarter alone enough for Smith to unseat Hill though? Not in my opinion.

The bigger issue is that we don't really have a TRUE QB on this team, or at least one that the fans feel has the right stuff to lead our team all the way. What we have is a collection of mediocrity, and the decision is really, "which one, out of these, will suck the least?"

I think you're comments a reasonable and logical. But IMHO, I think the Niners do have a TRUE QB on this team. Smith looks like he's confident and has stepped up to the plate. He's playing with a bit more swagger than in times past.

I don't blame anyone for their doubts, I have a few lingering doubts myself. But I think this is the year Smith will prove himself as a TRUE QB.... if that is Singletary gives him that opportunity.

Originally posted by B650:
I'm not buying the "game manager" crap. I don't see many game managers in the playoffs. I see Eli Manning. I see Ben Roethlisberger. I see Phillip Rivers. I see Peyton Manning. I see Matt Ryan. I see the likes of Tony Romo, Tom Brady, Kerry Collins, Joe Flacco, and so on. THAT is what we need. When was the last time that type of QB's team had any success? Tampa Bay, a decade ago? Dilfer? I mean come on. Our team isn't built to have just a game manager of a QB. Our defense isn't a top 5 defense. Our special teams isn't a top 5 special teams unit. Our offense isn't a top 5 offense. So we should be happy that we have a game manager? For what? To manage the game until we lose in the final seconds?

This is the problem with the 49ers. Before, we had Montana, Young, and Garcia. We had the mentality of killing other teams, not managing the game until the 4th quarter and see what happens. I like Hill, but he is, in no way, an NFL starter for an average franchise (like us right now). Put him on a team with a top 5 defense and then you might have something.

I want Smith or Davis and I want to see them develop. If they don't work, let's get someone next year and end this BS. WHATEVER it takes. I'm trading next year's 2 1st round picks if I have to in order to get one.

I agree with your assessment that we need a legit NFL QB. Unfortunately, finding an NFL QB is harder than it sounds. It is very rare for a starting QB to hit the free agent market. This is a QB driven league and teams will lock their QB into contracts.

Your post is exactly my argument for playing Smith. To return to the glory days we need a legit QB, not a game manager. I'm all for starting Smith this season. If he succeeds, then we have a QB for many years to come. If he doesn't, then it's time to move on to the next one.

Shoot, I'm open to starting Nate Davis this season. What do we have to lose? If he shows something, then we might have ourselves a long-term solution. I

I just can't get myself behind Hill. I will support him 100% if he is named starter. But I just don't see him as the one to return us back to the glory days. I'll be the first one to eat my words if he proves me wrong. But until then, I remain skeptical.

This is a QB driven league. As of right now, we don't have one. Can we get to the playoffs without one? Sure, anythings possible. But we will not be able to maintain league dominance until we have a QB. Simple as that.

Making the playoffs is not enough. We need to be competing for the Superbowl year in and year out.

This QB competition lasting into the third preseason game means really one thing, we don't have a Franchise QB to guide this team. At some point this club needs to acquire a solid veteran QB and/ or draft a future franchise QB in 2010. I really think this should have been pursued more aggressively over the last two years. Obviously the organization felt the same way cause they offered Kurt Warner a deal this off-season. The loser of this QB competition needs to be sent packing after this year so we can make room for new, fresh talent. Keeping these two QB's around in the same clubhouse just prolongs this eventual need to bring in somebody with more talent.