There are 152 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

QB Competition

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!
[ Edited by Thrash88 on Aug 24, 2009 at 1:01 PM ]
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!
[ Edited by mustangmele on Aug 24, 2009 at 1:16 PM ]
  • B650
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,205
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.
[ Edited by B650 on Aug 24, 2009 at 1:10 PM ]
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?"
  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 30,894
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.
  • KasparHauser
  • Info N/A
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.
[ Edited by mustangmele on Aug 24, 2009 at 1:20 PM ]
  • rum53
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 761
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.
  • jerryricefan80
  • Info N/A
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.
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by TOP_CAT:
Here is what Matt B. said today about what the QB depth chart might look like this year ( in answe to a question about possibly drafting White in a later round) ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are the scenarios I see going into the season:

1. Hill, Smith, Huard (White?)
2. Hill, Garcia, Huard, (White?)
3. Hill, Smith, rookie (White or other rookie)
4. Hill, Garcia, rookie. (White or other rookie)

----------------------------------------------------------

Looks like Matt has enough sense to know that Hill is the starter and that Alex (if he stays) will be a backup at best.

Yeah, but last year we all thought Hill was starting also. History has shown that these coaches can't decide on their QB. Let's hope Singletary changes this. I have a feeling that unless a QB blows him out of the water, he is not changing Hill's status.

I agree. At least when Martz was here, he knew who his QB would be, regardless of how it ended up to be.

For a new HC, you would think the first thing that would be taken care of is the QB position. But now I'm coming to the conclusion that if Sanchez or Stafford is there at #10 one of them will be our starter.

But then again, you would name your starter right away even if a rookie was drafted. That way if he beats your crowned king, it only makes you and your staff look that much better. And if your crowned king does end up starting the season, it would show you made the right decision with him.

I am comfortable with how Singletary makes his decisions. Martz did know who his QB was going to be but his problem was that he didn't know when he should have changed his QB and Nolan didn't have a spine to do anything.

I will be very comfortable if Hill starts with Singletary because Singletary has already shown he won't settle for crap play and pull Hill if needed
.

Very true, which chaps my ass, as to why Singletary hasn't named Hill the starter. After all wouldn't you go into the season with the QB that pretty much adds to the reason that he is our HC??

Well in that case I would imagine Smith should be named the starter since he's out performing Hill so far this pre-season.... it's all perspective.
I'm not saying I want Smith to start I'm just saying get off the Hill bandwagon. People saying 7-3 need to slow down because he didn't do much of anything. This year the starter will be decided based on who is better NOW not who had the glory moments. By the way if it was based on glory moments I think Smith would take the spot with his sweet famous seahawks raping lol I don't want Smith or Hill to be handed the spot is my point. I want someone to step up and TAKE IT and personally I think Smith has looked better through two games and that's what counts so far. But it's all out the window because in reality all that matters is the week of practice and the Cowboys game and well see who rises from the dust!
I applaud hill for his 7-3 record. But if thats going to be brought up (all the time) as a postive, then its only fair to evaluate the games/opponents. He didnt get to choose who he played...I agree. Just like Alex didnt CHOOSE to have 5 coordinators, 2 shoulder surgeries, and an inept HC, etc.


I dont understand the double standard. When ever anyone brings up the wins in 2006, the Smith haters come on and say, "Well it was all Gore." Oh...so now we are analyzing wins? So then I could say, "Alex didnt CHOOSE the play that was called..." Cmon...

It goes both ways. If you're going to discredit all of Alex's wins as, "well it was all defense, and all Gore..." then people are going to scrutinize and analyze Hills wins. If you dont want them to, then dont bring up "7-3 dood 7-3 thatz allz I gotta saii!"

Again, Im not trying to discredit Hill. A win is a win. I'm just saying, lets hold BOTH QBs to the SAME STANDARD and the SAME LEVEL of scrutiny.
Originally posted by jerryricefan80:
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.

Well, we have two first rounders and there are some good QB's coming out of the draft... you might get what you want.
  • Nes49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 5,321
Originally posted by mustangmele:
Originally posted by jerryricefan80:
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.

Well, we have two first rounders and there are some good QB's coming out of the draft... you might get what you want.

Need a pass rush more.....if nothing else...Nate Davis looked aight.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home