There are 148 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Arguments for Alex Smith and Shaun Hill to Start

Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by PTulini:
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by 49ers1fan1982:
Originally posted by Super5:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "[b]Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!
[/b]
also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

So I don't know WTF I'm talking about??

Let me dumb down my statement for those who no comprende-SHAUN HILL RUNS JIMMY RAYE'S OFFENSE(HE IS THE QB)and is not doing a very good job at it.The NFL stats don't lie so go on that.The problem starts in the trenches with Hill at QB but not when Smith is at QB right????


If no improvement soon there needs to be a change(Smith or Davis) because

I WANT WINNERS

You rant SO MUCH you're all twisted up in your own BS.So you live your life on the zone so what that's your trip,doesn't mean you run this zone so don't tell me or anybody else to stop posting!


interesting when hill does bad its the OC fault but when smith does bad its his fault? makes no sense

My thoughts exactly!

Not to jump in on it, but I have a difficult time refraining. It's rather appalling to me that things like OC and OL, that were considered "Alexcuses" are now valid reasoning behind Hill's mediocrity. I don't like that we're operating under double standards here. Let's keep it level.

To an outsider looking at all of this now, I wouldn't be surprised if they felt Alex was the better QB. Maybe, maybe not. I'm not saying -- I'm just saying..

This all isn't about Shaun or Alex, it's about this team and what will help us win, both now and in the future.

I'm not trying to knock Hill, nor am I trying to elevate Alex; it's just important that people get off their high horse trying to proclaim Hill's something special or "so superior" or a "winner" compared to Alex, as if Alex can't win games. Alex can win. Hill can win. But his play has been shaky this year, and if people can at least admit that, it will go a long way in easing this "debate."

Hills record is inflated due to the poor teams he's faced.

Since 2007, Hill has only played against 7 teams with winning records (that includes this season, too, based on current records). His record against those teams with winning records is 2-5, with his only notable victory coming against New York last year at home. His other win was against Tampa at home in 2007 when they had pulled their starting defenders after learning they had already clinched a playoff birth.

Now, to be fair, Alex didn't beat any winning teams as a rookie, and was 3-5 against winning teams in 2006. Though two of those wins came on the road in very hostile environments, one being against a team who needed a win to make the playoffs. We know that was Denver, whom Alex drove us down for the game-winning score against. Now, 2007 is a bit too small of a sample size among healthy games, but if you want to add that in, he lost on the road against the AFC North Division Champs, Pittsburgh.

I just want to see Hill play well on the road and beat someone. If he can beat Houston and/or Indy, that'll impress me.

And if he can't win either, he should be benched.

I agree. If he shows nothing, and helps in dropping us to 3-4, changes could -- and I'm guessing would -- be made.
[ Edited by OnTheClock on Oct 16, 2009 at 11:41 PM ]
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!

also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

Excuse me, but if everyone was booed off the field that day, then how does that not include Shaun Hill? He got booed after awful passes and was booed off the field on several drives along with the offense. He deserved to be booed. I booed him from my TV screen, and let me be clear that I didn't have a problem with Hill starting until he's regressed to the point he's gotten now, and put up the stinker he did. I vented my frustration aloud because that kind of play is unacceptable for a starter at his age and experience level in the NFL. And again, just because Hill was not the sole recipient of boos does not make the statement, "He was booed off the field" a falsity. Not at all.

Don't put all the blame on the OL. They do deserve some of it, but I honestly feel Hill has been figured out. The reason is this: Look, he was sacked a LOT last year and still played well, making him deserving to be the starter this year. He's being sacked at almost the same rate this year, yet.. he looks far, far worse. Can anyone accept this at least?

Another poster brought up QB's who are still having success despite the sacks they're taking, such as Rodgers who's been sacked more than anyone in the entire NFL.

Like I said before, I thought Hill earned his shot, but I'm not going to make excuses for him if he doesn't play up to acceptable standards. He needs to play better, and HE KNOWS he needs to play better. He was frustrated with himself -- he addmited it -- and he should have been.

OnTheClock.... there is one big difference between last year and this year....and that is the offensive playcalling. So while, yes Shaun was getting sacked, we were still moving the ball because of his arm last year.....just like Rodgers is doing.

and this is what I expect from our offense as the season goes on.....for us to be less predictable....and with Crabtree playing and Gore back there to properly pick up the blitz....we should, as a whole, play better.....

I don't expect the Oline to all the sudden turn into ProBowlers.....but these same guys played well together on crucial 3rd downs last year.....so I can see them improving if they play and communicated better as a unit.......well at least I hope, I believe we run a different blocking scheme with Raye this year, so I don't know if we might have to switch some other things up a bit.

Shaun looked like he tried to do his part, to make up for the blitzing and the penetration the Falcons were getting against our Oline........basically by trying to hit the hot read, in this case Vernon.........so this is where I feel communication is one of the main ways our offense can and should play better these next few weeks.....if Vernon cut in on those passes.....he could've got some big gains if not TDs....and that would have helped our Oline later in the game, by keeping the defense honest.

If Vernon was 6 inches tall, maybe he would have had a shot, it was obvious that Hill was just throwing the ball away. He was getting instant pressure from up the middle due to the terrible play of our guards. Also Hill is not totally free from blame when it comes to the third down conversion %, as I posted in earlier threads, Hill has been given complete freedom to audible if he sees something that needs addressing. So if he is sticking with plays he knows are not going to get it done, like dump offs on third and long, it is nobody's fault but Hills. If you do not believe me just use the search function with the keywords Shaun Hill + Audibles, and he explains why he thinks Raye's offense is superior to Martz's. Hill has seriously regressed his level of play, and though it might have to do with the line and playcalling to a certain extent, there is no excuse for much of what he has failed at this year. There is a reason he was a career backup, and that reason is not going to go away just because a few unrealistic fans wish it to be so.
[ Edited by Memphis9er on Oct 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM ]
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!

also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

Excuse me, but if everyone was booed off the field that day, then how does that not include Shaun Hill? He got booed after awful passes and was booed off the field on several drives along with the offense. He deserved to be booed. I booed him from my TV screen, and let me be clear that I didn't have a problem with Hill starting until he's regressed to the point he's gotten now, and put up the stinker he did. I vented my frustration aloud because that kind of play is unacceptable for a starter at his age and experience level in the NFL. And again, just because Hill was not the sole recipient of boos does not make the statement, "He was booed off the field" a falsity. Not at all.

Don't put all the blame on the OL. They do deserve some of it, but I honestly feel Hill has been figured out. The reason is this: Look, he was sacked a LOT last year and still played well, making him deserving to be the starter this year. He's being sacked at almost the same rate this year, yet.. he looks far, far worse. Can anyone accept this at least?

Another poster brought up QB's who are still having success despite the sacks they're taking, such as Rodgers who's been sacked more than anyone in the entire NFL.

Like I said before, I thought Hill earned his shot, but I'm not going to make excuses for him if he doesn't play up to acceptable standards. He needs to play better, and HE KNOWS he needs to play better. He was frustrated with himself -- he addmited it -- and he should have been.

OnTheClock.... there is one big difference between last year and this year....and that is the offensive playcalling. So while, yes Shaun was getting sacked, we were still moving the ball because of his arm last year.....just like Rodgers is doing.

and this is what I expect from our offense as the season goes on.....for us to be less predictable....and with Crabtree playing and Gore back there to properly pick up the blitz....we should, as a whole, play better.....

I don't expect the Oline to all the sudden turn into ProBowlers.....but these same guys played well together on crucial 3rd downs last year.....so I can see them improving if they play and communicated better as a unit.......well at least I hope, I believe we run a different blocking scheme with Raye this year, so I don't know if we might have to switch some other things up a bit.

Shaun looked like he tried to do his part, to make up for the blitzing and the penetration the Falcons were getting against our Oline........basically by trying to hit the hot read, in this case Vernon.........so this is where I feel communication is one of the main ways our offense can and should play better these next few weeks.....if Vernon cut in on those passes.....he could've got some big gains if not TDs....and that would have helped our Oline later in the game, by keeping the defense honest.

If Vernon was 6 inches tall, maybe he would have had a shot, it was obvious that Hill was just throwing the ball away. He was getting instant pressure from up the middle due to the terrible play of our guards. Also Hill is not totally free from blame when it comes to the third down conversion %, as I posted in earlier threads, Hill has been given complete freedom to audible if he sees something that needs addressing. So if he is sticking with plays he knows are not going to get it done, like dump offs on third and long, it is nobody's fault but Hills. If you do not believe me just use the search function with the keywords Shaun Hill + Audibles, and he explains why he thinks Raye's offense is superior to Martz's. Hill has seriously regressed his level of play, and though it might have to do with the line and playcalling to a certain extent, there is no excuse for much of what he has failed at this year. There is a reason he was a career backup, and that reason is not going to go away just because a few unrealistic fans wish it to be so.

That made me laugh.

But yes, Hill had several in the dirt and some others that were almost intercepted.
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!

also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

Excuse me, but if everyone was booed off the field that day, then how does that not include Shaun Hill? He got booed after awful passes and was booed off the field on several drives along with the offense. He deserved to be booed. I booed him from my TV screen, and let me be clear that I didn't have a problem with Hill starting until he's regressed to the point he's gotten now, and put up the stinker he did. I vented my frustration aloud because that kind of play is unacceptable for a starter at his age and experience level in the NFL. And again, just because Hill was not the sole recipient of boos does not make the statement, "He was booed off the field" a falsity. Not at all.

Don't put all the blame on the OL. They do deserve some of it, but I honestly feel Hill has been figured out. The reason is this: Look, he was sacked a LOT last year and still played well, making him deserving to be the starter this year. He's being sacked at almost the same rate this year, yet.. he looks far, far worse. Can anyone accept this at least?

Another poster brought up QB's who are still having success despite the sacks they're taking, such as Rodgers who's been sacked more than anyone in the entire NFL.

Like I said before, I thought Hill earned his shot, but I'm not going to make excuses for him if he doesn't play up to acceptable standards. He needs to play better, and HE KNOWS he needs to play better. He was frustrated with himself -- he addmited it -- and he should have been.

OnTheClock.... there is one big difference between last year and this year....and that is the offensive playcalling. So while, yes Shaun was getting sacked, we were still moving the ball because of his arm last year.....just like Rodgers is doing.

and this is what I expect from our offense as the season goes on.....for us to be less predictable....and with Crabtree playing and Gore back there to properly pick up the blitz....we should, as a whole, play better.....

I don't expect the Oline to all the sudden turn into ProBowlers.....but these same guys played well together on crucial 3rd downs last year.....so I can see them improving if they play and communicated better as a unit.......well at least I hope, I believe we run a different blocking scheme with Raye this year, so I don't know if we might have to switch some other things up a bit.

Shaun looked like he tried to do his part, to make up for the blitzing and the penetration the Falcons were getting against our Oline........basically by trying to hit the hot read, in this case Vernon.........so this is where I feel communication is one of the main ways our offense can and should play better these next few weeks.....if Vernon cut in on those passes.....he could've got some big gains if not TDs....and that would have helped our Oline later in the game, by keeping the defense honest.

If Vernon was 6 inches tall, maybe he would have had a shot, it was obvious that Hill was just throwing the ball away. He was getting instant pressure from up the middle due to the terrible play of our guards. Also Hill is not totally free from blame when it comes to the third down conversion %, as I posted in earlier threads, Hill has been given complete freedom to audible if he sees something that needs addressing. So if he is sticking with plays he knows are not going to get it done, like dump offs on third and long, it is nobody's fault but Hills. If you do not believe me just use the search function with the keywords Shaun Hill + Audibles, and he explains why he thinks Raye's offense is superior to Martz's. Hill has seriously regressed his level of play, and though it might have to do with the line and playcalling to a certain extent, there is no excuse for much of what he has failed at this year. There is a reason he was a career backup, and that reason is not going to go away just because a few unrealistic fans wish it to be so.

That made me laugh.

But yes, Hill had several in the dirt and some others that were almost intercepted.

That was his highly talked about accuracy and ability to throw the short passes.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
I think we are good enough to win the west with whichever QB we put in there, Smith just makes the team a little more dynamic.

This is breaking down the entire conversation into one sentence... Great post!
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
I think we are good enough to win the west with whichever QB we put in there, Smith just makes the team a little more dynamic.

This is breaking down the entire conversation into one sentence... Great post!

I would start Smith for the fact that he can throw the long ball much better. Once Crabtree comes and Hill gets back to form I'd put Smith in.
Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by PTulini:
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by 49ers1fan1982:
Originally posted by Super5:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "[b]Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!
[/b]
also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

So I don't know WTF I'm talking about??

Let me dumb down my statement for those who no comprende-SHAUN HILL RUNS JIMMY RAYE'S OFFENSE(HE IS THE QB)and is not doing a very good job at it.The NFL stats don't lie so go on that.The problem starts in the trenches with Hill at QB but not when Smith is at QB right????


If no improvement soon there needs to be a change(Smith or Davis) because

I WANT WINNERS

You rant SO MUCH you're all twisted up in your own BS.So you live your life on the zone so what that's your trip,doesn't mean you run this zone so don't tell me or anybody else to stop posting!


interesting when hill does bad its the OC fault but when smith does bad its his fault? makes no sense

My thoughts exactly!

Not to jump in on it, but I have a difficult time refraining. It's rather appalling to me that things like OC and OL, that were considered "Alexcuses" are now valid reasoning behind Hill's mediocrity. I don't like that we're operating under double standards here. Let's keep it level.

To an outsider looking at all of this now, I wouldn't be surprised if they felt Alex was the better QB. Maybe, maybe not. I'm not saying -- I'm just saying..

This all isn't about Shaun or Alex, it's about this team and what will help us win, both now and in the future.

I'm not trying to knock Hill, nor am I trying to elevate Alex; it's just important that people get off their high horse trying to proclaim Hill's something special or "so superior" or a "winner" compared to Alex, as if Alex can't win games. Alex can win. Hill can win. But his play has been shaky this year, and if people can at least admit that, it will go a long way in easing this "debate."

Hills record is inflated due to the poor teams he's faced.

Since 2007, Hill has only played against 7 teams with winning records (that includes this season, too, based on current records). His record against those teams with winning records is 2-5, with his only notable victory coming against New York last year at home. His other win was against Tampa at home in 2007 when they had pulled their starting defenders after learning they had already clinched a playoff birth.

Now, to be fair, Alex didn't beat any winning teams as a rookie, and was 3-5 against winning teams in 2006. Though two of those wins came on the road in very hostile environments, one being against a team who needed a win to make the playoffs. We know that was Denver, whom Alex drove us down for the game-winning score against. Now, 2007 is a bit too small of a sample size among healthy games, but if you want to add that in, he lost on the road against the AFC North Division Champs, Pittsburgh.

I just want to see Hill play well on the road and beat someone. If he can beat Houston and/or Indy, that'll impress me.

And if he can't win either, he should be benched.

I wouldn't say that. As much as I want Hill to be benched, if he plays well (better than in any game this season so far) in those games but the team still loses, he might deserve to keep the starting job.

Conversely if he continues to look like he has all year and play poorly he should be benched even if THE TEAM wins both of those games. They're going to have to look at the big picture and if all he's has are 2-4 good quarters over 7 games a change needs to be made regardless of record.

The 2000 Ravens were 5-1 at one point, beat a hapless divisional foe 37-0 in week 4 (sound familiar?), and went on to win the next two games without the offense scoring a TD. This might not be the best example because they lost the next three games before switching to Trent Dilfer for the rest of the season and the superbowl but A.) I don't want to lose three in a row, & B.) there is no way they make the Superbowl, even with that D, without making that switch at QB.

I'm not going to say we're going to win the SB if we make a change under center right now but the similarities are there.

-They won games early on with great D and special teams
-They did not have a clear starting QB coming out of preseason
-They got a decent running game going, relying on a rookie and a 4 year vet
-Their leading receiver was a Tight End
-The star player on that team was a young LB that would dominate games
-They had an accurate FG kicker
-They shut out a bad team in division 37-0 in week 4 without Banks playing all that well (like we did 35-0 in week 4 without Shaun Hill playing well)

That team was 5-1 after 6 games but was 5-4 after 9. Most notably because their QB was not creating 1st downs or scoring TDs. They made a switch at QB, to TRENT DILFER of all people, and won out the rest of the season and the Super Bowl. There are enough other similarities there, why not see what can be done? Once you do the intellectually honest thing and admit to yourself that Shaun Hill has not played one AVE-GOOD game through more than a quarter of the season so far it's a pretty easy call to make.
  • B650
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,205
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by PTulini:
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by 49ers1fan1982:
Originally posted by Super5:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "[b]Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!
[/b]
also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

So I don't know WTF I'm talking about??

Let me dumb down my statement for those who no comprende-SHAUN HILL RUNS JIMMY RAYE'S OFFENSE(HE IS THE QB)and is not doing a very good job at it.The NFL stats don't lie so go on that.The problem starts in the trenches with Hill at QB but not when Smith is at QB right????


If no improvement soon there needs to be a change(Smith or Davis) because

I WANT WINNERS

You rant SO MUCH you're all twisted up in your own BS.So you live your life on the zone so what that's your trip,doesn't mean you run this zone so don't tell me or anybody else to stop posting!


interesting when hill does bad its the OC fault but when smith does bad its his fault? makes no sense

My thoughts exactly!

Not to jump in on it, but I have a difficult time refraining. It's rather appalling to me that things like OC and OL, that were considered "Alexcuses" are now valid reasoning behind Hill's mediocrity. I don't like that we're operating under double standards here. Let's keep it level.

To an outsider looking at all of this now, I wouldn't be surprised if they felt Alex was the better QB. Maybe, maybe not. I'm not saying -- I'm just saying..

This all isn't about Shaun or Alex, it's about this team and what will help us win, both now and in the future.

I'm not trying to knock Hill, nor am I trying to elevate Alex; it's just important that people get off their high horse trying to proclaim Hill's something special or "so superior" or a "winner" compared to Alex, as if Alex can't win games. Alex can win. Hill can win. But his play has been shaky this year, and if people can at least admit that, it will go a long way in easing this "debate."

Hills record is inflated due to the poor teams he's faced.

Since 2007, Hill has only played against 7 teams with winning records (that includes this season, too, based on current records). His record against those teams with winning records is 2-5, with his only notable victory coming against New York last year at home. His other win was against Tampa at home in 2007 when they had pulled their starting defenders after learning they had already clinched a playoff birth.

Now, to be fair, Alex didn't beat any winning teams as a rookie, and was 3-5 against winning teams in 2006. Though two of those wins came on the road in very hostile environments, one being against a team who needed a win to make the playoffs. We know that was Denver, whom Alex drove us down for the game-winning score against. Now, 2007 is a bit too small of a sample size among healthy games, but if you want to add that in, he lost on the road against the AFC North Division Champs, Pittsburgh.

I just want to see Hill play well on the road and beat someone. If he can beat Houston and/or Indy, that'll impress me.

And if he can't win either, he should be benched.

I wouldn't say that. As much as I want Hill to be benched, if he plays well (better than in any game this season so far) in those games but the team still loses, he might deserve to keep the starting job.

Conversely if he continues to look like he has all year and play poorly he should be benched even if THE TEAM wins both of those games. They're going to have to look at the big picture and if all he's has are 2-4 good quarters over 7 games a change needs to be made regardless of record.

The 2000 Ravens were 5-1 at one point, beat a hapless divisional foe 37-0 in week 4 (sound familiar?), and went on to win the next two games without the offense scoring a TD. This might not be the best example because they lost the next three games before switching to Trent Dilfer for the rest of the season and the superbowl but A.) I don't want to lose three in a row, & B.) there is no way they make the Superbowl, even with that D, without making that switch at QB.

I'm not going to say we're going to win the SB if we make a change under center right now but the similarities are there.

-They won games early on with great D and special teams
-They did not have a clear starting QB coming out of preseason
-They got a decent running game going, relying on a rookie and a 4 year vet
-Their leading receiver was a Tight End
-The star player on that team was a young LB that would dominate games
-They had an accurate FG kicker
-They shut out a bad team in division 37-0 in week 4 without Banks playing all that well (like we did 35-0 in week 4 without Shaun Hill playing well)

That team was 5-1 after 6 games but was 5-4 after 9. Most notably because their QB was not creating 1st downs or scoring TDs. They made a switch at QB, to TRENT DILFER of all people, and won out the rest of the season and the Super Bowl. There are enough other similarities there, why not see what can be done? Once you do the intellectually honest thing and admit to yourself that Shaun Hill has not played one AVE-GOOD game through more than a quarter of the season so far it's a pretty easy call to make.

I see your point, but at the same time, this isn't the 2000 Ravens. In order to win with a QB like Trent Dilfer, or Shaun Hill, or let's call him Shaun Dilfer from now on, you have to have an INCREDIBLE defense, offensive line, defensive line, running backs, and special teams. Do we? I think we know the answer to that. So, if we don't have any of this, what's the easiest way to improve all of them without getting 10 new players to fix them all? Simple, the QB position. Shaun Dilfer shouldn't be starting on this team because we don't have talent to start a game-manager QB right now. That's the bottom line. Imagine if the Packers had Shaun Dilfer. They'd be 0-5. Since they have Aaron Rodgers, they'll hang around and compete for a playoff spot. Our team was pretty bad in 1998 to be honest, but we still made the playoffs. We had no defense at all, bad special teams, and a horrible offensive line. But guess what? We had Steve Young to make up for it.
[ Edited by B650 on Oct 17, 2009 at 4:10 PM ]
Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
I wouldn't say that. As much as I want Hill to be benched, if he plays well (better than in any game this season so far) in those games but the team still loses, he might deserve to keep the starting job.

Conversely if he continues to look like he has all year and play poorly he should be benched even if THE TEAM wins both of those games. They're going to have to look at the big picture and if all he's has are 2-4 good quarters over 7 games a change needs to be made regardless of record.

The 2000 Ravens were 5-1 at one point, beat a hapless divisional foe 37-0 in week 4 (sound familiar?), and went on to win the next two games without the offense scoring a TD. This might not be the best example because they lost the next three games before switching to Trent Dilfer for the rest of the season and the superbowl but A.) I don't want to lose three in a row, & B.) there is no way they make the Superbowl, even with that D, without making that switch at QB.

I'm not going to say we're going to win the SB if we make a change under center right now but the similarities are there.

-They won games early on with great D and special teams
-They did not have a clear starting QB coming out of preseason
-They got a decent running game going, relying on a rookie and a 4 year vet
-Their leading receiver was a Tight End
-The star player on that team was a young LB that would dominate games
-They had an accurate FG kicker
-They shut out a bad team in division 37-0 in week 4 without Banks playing all that well (like we did 35-0 in week 4 without Shaun Hill playing well)

That team was 5-1 after 6 games but was 5-4 after 9. Most notably because their QB was not creating 1st downs or scoring TDs. They made a switch at QB, to TRENT DILFER of all people, and won out the rest of the season and the Super Bowl. There are enough other similarities there, why not see what can be done? Once you do the intellectually honest thing and admit to yourself that Shaun Hill has not played one AVE-GOOD game through more than a quarter of the season so far it's a pretty easy call to make.

I see your point, but at the same time, this isn't the 2000 Ravens. In order to win with a QB like Trent Dilfer, or Shaun Hill, or let's call him Shaun Dilfer from now on, you have to have an INCREDIBLE defense, offensive line, defensive line, running backs, and special teams. Do we? I think we know the answer to that. So, if we don't have any of this, what's the easiest way to improve all of them without getting 10 new players to fix them all? Simple, the QB position. Shaun Dilfer shouldn't be starting on this team because we don't have talent to start a game-manager QB right now. That's the bottom line. Imagine if the Packers had Shaun Dilfer. They'd be 0-5. Since they have Aaron Rodgers, they'll hang around and compete for a playoff spot. Our team was pretty bad in 1998 to be honest, but we still made the playoffs. We had no defense at all, bad special teams, and a horrible offensive line. But guess what? We had Steve Young to make up for it.

The 2000 Ravens were not supposed to win anything either. Also, Dilfer played much better down the stretch that season than Hill has played this season. My point is, a change has got to be made, regardless of record, should Hill have even one more game like ANY of the first five games. Not one of them has been good enough, win or no win.
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
I wouldn't say that. As much as I want Hill to be benched, if he plays well (better than in any game this season so far) in those games but the team still loses, he might deserve to keep the starting job.

Conversely if he continues to look like he has all year and play poorly he should be benched even if THE TEAM wins both of those games. They're going to have to look at the big picture and if all he's has are 2-4 good quarters over 7 games a change needs to be made regardless of record.

The 2000 Ravens were 5-1 at one point, beat a hapless divisional foe 37-0 in week 4 (sound familiar?), and went on to win the next two games without the offense scoring a TD. This might not be the best example because they lost the next three games before switching to Trent Dilfer for the rest of the season and the superbowl but A.) I don't want to lose three in a row, & B.) there is no way they make the Superbowl, even with that D, without making that switch at QB.

I'm not going to say we're going to win the SB if we make a change under center right now but the similarities are there.

-They won games early on with great D and special teams
-They did not have a clear starting QB coming out of preseason
-They got a decent running game going, relying on a rookie and a 4 year vet
-Their leading receiver was a Tight End
-The star player on that team was a young LB that would dominate games
-They had an accurate FG kicker
-They shut out a bad team in division 37-0 in week 4 without Banks playing all that well (like we did 35-0 in week 4 without Shaun Hill playing well)

That team was 5-1 after 6 games but was 5-4 after 9. Most notably because their QB was not creating 1st downs or scoring TDs. They made a switch at QB, to TRENT DILFER of all people, and won out the rest of the season and the Super Bowl. There are enough other similarities there, why not see what can be done? Once you do the intellectually honest thing and admit to yourself that Shaun Hill has not played one AVE-GOOD game through more than a quarter of the season so far it's a pretty easy call to make.

I see your point, but at the same time, this isn't the 2000 Ravens. In order to win with a QB like Trent Dilfer, or Shaun Hill, or let's call him Shaun Dilfer from now on, you have to have an INCREDIBLE defense, offensive line, defensive line, running backs, and special teams. Do we? I think we know the answer to that. So, if we don't have any of this, what's the easiest way to improve all of them without getting 10 new players to fix them all? Simple, the QB position. Shaun Dilfer shouldn't be starting on this team because we don't have talent to start a game-manager QB right now. That's the bottom line. Imagine if the Packers had Shaun Dilfer. They'd be 0-5. Since they have Aaron Rodgers, they'll hang around and compete for a playoff spot. Our team was pretty bad in 1998 to be honest, but we still made the playoffs. We had no defense at all, bad special teams, and a horrible offensive line. But guess what? We had Steve Young to make up for it.

The 2000 Ravens were not supposed to win anything either. Also, Dilfer played much better down the stretch that season than Hill has played this season. My point is, a change has got to be made, regardless of record, should Hill have even one more game like ANY of the first five games. Not one of them has been good enough, win or no win.

Singletary cares more about wins and turnovers than QB production.

If we win, Hill keeps the job

If we lose and Hill doesn't throw any INT's or fumbles the ball away, Hill keeps the job.

If we lose and Hill throws INT's and/or fumbles the game away, Alex will get his chance.
[ Edited by dirtysouthniner on Oct 17, 2009 at 5:32 PM ]
The only argument that matters is why protect the ball if you're only determined to give it back in 4 plays without scoring a single point anyway?

I can't believe that people are so damn worried about ball control when we can't control the thing with our lame duck QB. Pun indeed intended.

~Ceadder
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
I wouldn't say that. As much as I want Hill to be benched, if he plays well (better than in any game this season so far) in those games but the team still loses, he might deserve to keep the starting job.

Conversely if he continues to look like he has all year and play poorly he should be benched even if THE TEAM wins both of those games. They're going to have to look at the big picture and if all he's has are 2-4 good quarters over 7 games a change needs to be made regardless of record.

The 2000 Ravens were 5-1 at one point, beat a hapless divisional foe 37-0 in week 4 (sound familiar?), and went on to win the next two games without the offense scoring a TD. This might not be the best example because they lost the next three games before switching to Trent Dilfer for the rest of the season and the superbowl but A.) I don't want to lose three in a row, & B.) there is no way they make the Superbowl, even with that D, without making that switch at QB.

I'm not going to say we're going to win the SB if we make a change under center right now but the similarities are there.

-They won games early on with great D and special teams
-They did not have a clear starting QB coming out of preseason
-They got a decent running game going, relying on a rookie and a 4 year vet
-Their leading receiver was a Tight End
-The star player on that team was a young LB that would dominate games
-They had an accurate FG kicker
-They shut out a bad team in division 37-0 in week 4 without Banks playing all that well (like we did 35-0 in week 4 without Shaun Hill playing well)

That team was 5-1 after 6 games but was 5-4 after 9. Most notably because their QB was not creating 1st downs or scoring TDs. They made a switch at QB, to TRENT DILFER of all people, and won out the rest of the season and the Super Bowl. There are enough other similarities there, why not see what can be done? Once you do the intellectually honest thing and admit to yourself that Shaun Hill has not played one AVE-GOOD game through more than a quarter of the season so far it's a pretty easy call to make.

I see your point, but at the same time, this isn't the 2000 Ravens. In order to win with a QB like Trent Dilfer, or Shaun Hill, or let's call him Shaun Dilfer from now on, you have to have an INCREDIBLE defense, offensive line, defensive line, running backs, and special teams. Do we? I think we know the answer to that. So, if we don't have any of this, what's the easiest way to improve all of them without getting 10 new players to fix them all? Simple, the QB position. Shaun Dilfer shouldn't be starting on this team because we don't have talent to start a game-manager QB right now. That's the bottom line. Imagine if the Packers had Shaun Dilfer. They'd be 0-5. Since they have Aaron Rodgers, they'll hang around and compete for a playoff spot. Our team was pretty bad in 1998 to be honest, but we still made the playoffs. We had no defense at all, bad special teams, and a horrible offensive line. But guess what? We had Steve Young to make up for it.

The 2000 Ravens were not supposed to win anything either. Also, Dilfer played much better down the stretch that season than Hill has played this season. My point is, a change has got to be made, regardless of record, should Hill have even one more game like ANY of the first five games. Not one of them has been good enough, win or no win.

and that is not going to happen....simply put. I know some feel Shaun has played horrible in each of the previous games or what ever.....but besides the Falcons game.... he has played EXACTLY how Singletary has wanted him to play....hand the ball off....and take high percentage short and intermediate throws and keep the clock moving....and don't take a chance on the deep throw, unless we need to. And it has worked in Sing's favor for more than a couple of games....

do I agree with this philosophy.....no I don't.... but don't get me wrong, I don't want Hill to throw deep passes if it is not necessary "just to get a big play".....but what I do want is for us to pass more on early downs.....as well as pass out of situations where we still have a RB in the backfield...more often then not, I see us coming out in formations with our RB motioning out of the backfield....I say leave him back there so the "threat" of the run is always there.....our Oline is not good enough right now to where we make it 100% obvious that we are going to pass.
Afrikan, it DOES make a difference to go deep. Because it makes the Opposing Defense have to respect that aspect of the game. Sure not right away, but if you hit on enough of them for longer than 30 yards they have to adjust accordingly.

Originally posted by PTulini:
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by 49ers1fan1982:
Originally posted by Super5:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
a couple of more LIES some of these posters try to spew..... it is hilarious...

I read someone posted that if "[b]Hill's Offense continues to struggle on third down bla bla bla" Hill's offense???? THIS IS RAYE'S OFFENSE!!!! YOU DON'T KNOW WTF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, STOP POSTING!
[/b]
also we have another LAIR who is trying to give off the impression that our Home Crowd Booed Hill off the field, again...

EVERYONE GOT BOOED THAT DAY!! The Defense got Booed, The Offense got Booed, the dropped passes caused Boos....the dumb moves made by Morgan and Bly caused Boos....HILL getting sacked in 2 seconds caused boos....

STOP SPREADING OUT BS!

but continue the because Shaun Hill is the 49er starter....where as fans who have any sense (like some in this thread) know that our problem starts first and foremost at the most important area for a football team, the trenches.

I can't wait till I see my 49er starting QB play in 2 weeks....and root my team on....as well as Root on my backup QB who is doing a fine, by assisting his Starting QB, Shaun Hill, at getting ready for opposing defenses....

Great Job Shaun..... and Great Job Alex....

So I don't know WTF I'm talking about??

Let me dumb down my statement for those who no comprende-SHAUN HILL RUNS JIMMY RAYE'S OFFENSE(HE IS THE QB)and is not doing a very good job at it.The NFL stats don't lie so go on that.The problem starts in the trenches with Hill at QB but not when Smith is at QB right????


If no improvement soon there needs to be a change(Smith or Davis) because

I WANT WINNERS

You rant SO MUCH you're all twisted up in your own BS.So you live your life on the zone so what that's your trip,doesn't mean you run this zone so don't tell me or anybody else to stop posting!


interesting when hill does bad its the OC fault but when smith does bad its his fault? makes no sense

My thoughts exactly!

Sure it does.

The difference is $50 million. That's the difference.

~Ceadder
[ Edited by Ceadderman on Oct 17, 2009 at 5:44 PM ]
Originally posted by Ceadderman:
The only argument that matters is why protect the ball if you're only determined to give it back in 4 plays without scoring a single point anyway?

I can't believe that people are so damn worried about ball control when we can't control the thing with our lame duck QB. Pun indeed intended.

~Ceadder

You could be right. But Singletary cares more about turnovers than anything else. It is the curse of having a defensive minded coach. The only time Singletary considered benching Hill last year was after he threw a couple of interceptions. I expect Hill will continue to take sacks instead of taking chances. And I expect Singletary to continue to thank Hill for it.
[ Edited by dirtysouthniner on Oct 17, 2009 at 5:44 PM ]
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by Ceadderman:
The only argument that matters is why protect the ball if you're only determined to give it back in 4 plays without scoring a single point anyway?

I can't believe that people are so damn worried about ball control when we can't control the thing with our lame duck QB. Pun indeed intended.

~Ceadder

You could be right. But Singletary cares more about turnovers than anything else. It is the curse of having a defensive minded coach. The only time Singletary considered benching Hill last year was after he threw a couple of interceptions. I expect Hill will continue to take sacks instead of taking chances. And I expect Singletary to continue to thank Hill for it.

I know and it makes it so unbearable to watch.

Though it's like a good train wreck or pileup on the I-5. You can never just turn away. Then you see something that you wish you hadn't.

That is how our season is shaping up at the moment.

~Ceadder