There are 117 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Arguments for Alex Smith and Shaun Hill to Start

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

and this is EXACTLY how I felt about Alex and Garcia (late in his career with the 9ers)

where they would rather throw the ball away on 3rd downs than take the chance of trying to make the first down.

I became a Hill fan when he did the opposite of this and converted may 1st downs last year.......This year he doesn't seem to be doing them at the same rate.....I feel it has more to do with playcalling and the Oline more so that Hill.....some say that it is because teams have figured him out..... posters have been saying this since last year...but Hill was still being successful...... some are saying this year proves that teams have figured him out and its a lost cause to have him back there.....

If teams have figured him out (since last year apparently) then why did Arizona, after taking the lead, in the most important part of the game.....why were they not able to stop Hill....since it would be soooo easy right....but they couldn't and he guided a 80 yard drive for a TD....its not like there was one HUGE BIG play that helped us get down field.... the Cards had numerous chances at stopping us, but they couldn't stop our *gasp* passing game when it counted.

Same goes for Seattle....I know some like to think that they are weak or what ever, but their defense is legit......and again Hill drove on them when we need him to....and they could not stop us from getting points....I believe Hill drove 60yards and took off 8mins in the 4th qtr....

again....same thing with one of the best defenses in the league....the Vikes....when it counted Shaun picked them apart and drove down field....if he has been figured out by now, the Vikes of all teams should have put a stop to our drive from the very start.....but they couldn't....why? We took a 4point lead with a touchdown pass from Shaun.

I'm not saying Shaun Hill is playing lights out....but for alot of people to say that he should be benched because teams have figured him out....I don't know man....when the game is on the line, it doesn't seem like it.

The whole team came out flat and played horrible in the Falcons game......like some other posters have said....if the team is playing better, but it seems like Shaun is struggling and these next few games and it is clearly obvious that teams have "figured him out".....then yes I expect Singletary to make a change, and rightfully so.
[ Edited by Afrikan on Oct 17, 2009 at 6:05 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.


Isn't punting the ball considered a turn over technically? I mean you are giving the other teams offense the ball back. So does it really matter if it is an INT or a punt. I understand that you can attemtp to pin then inside the 5 yard line. But there is always the chance for a big return(especially this year) that will negate any long punt.
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.
Originally posted by brhokla:
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.

Ya!! Big arms = wins!! Doesn't everyone know that?!?
  • B650
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,205
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by brhokla:
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.

Ya!! Big arms = wins!! Doesn't everyone know that?!?

When the guy with a weak arm isn't producing, you can't lose much.
Originally posted by backontop:
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.


Isn't punting the ball considered a turn over technically? I mean you are giving the other teams offense the ball back. So does it really matter if it is an INT or a punt. I understand that you can attemtp to pin then inside the 5 yard line. But there is always the chance for a big return(especially this year) that will negate any long punt.

int u always have a better chance of returning it for a TD also always get better field position
Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:
Originally posted by backontop:
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.


Isn't punting the ball considered a turn over technically? I mean you are giving the other teams offense the ball back. So does it really matter if it is an INT or a punt. I understand that you can attemtp to pin then inside the 5 yard line. But there is always the chance for a big return(especially this year) that will negate any long punt.

int u always have a better chance of returning it for a TD also always get better field position

With our special teams play this year is there really a difference? There have been a few returns for TD's that have been called back so far. It is only a matter of time till there are a few that are let go with no flags on the field.
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by brhokla:
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.

Ya!! Big arms = wins!! Doesn't everyone know that?!?

Well, it is not working so well for the Raiders right now. But it sure makes it a lot easier for the opposing defense when they have little fear of the vertical game.
Originally posted by BHulman:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by brhokla:
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.

Ya!! Big arms = wins!! Doesn't everyone know that?!?

Well, it is not working so well for the Raiders right now. But it sure makes it a lot easier for the opposing defense when they have little fear of the vertical game.

I'll take accuracy over a big arm.
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by BHulman:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by brhokla:
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.

Ya!! Big arms = wins!! Doesn't everyone know that?!?

Well, it is not working so well for the Raiders right now. But it sure makes it a lot easier for the opposing defense when they have little fear of the vertical game.

I'll take accuracy over a big arm.

Agreed. Unfortunately, right now Shaun has neither.
Originally posted by wadjay:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by BHulman:
Originally posted by YourHuckleberry:
Originally posted by brhokla:
I just want the guy with the better arm playing cause we need it. Hill looks slow, passes look horrible and it's time now for a change.

Ya!! Big arms = wins!! Doesn't everyone know that?!?

Well, it is not working so well for the Raiders right now. But it sure makes it a lot easier for the opposing defense when they have little fear of the vertical game.

I'll take accuracy over a big arm.

Agreed. Unfortunately, right now Shaun has neither.

You kidding me? He's been good for us so far.

We just had one bad game, and people are s**tting their pants.
Hill won the job in TC he's had one bad game, we should be 4-1 to change the qb now is to make a rookie HC douche bad move.
The ATL game.

Josh Morgan: Targets 9 Catches 4
V. Davis: T 12 C 5
I. Bruce: T 4 C 0
Link

Compare those numbers to the other games, you can see a difference.

Not only that, their 3 sacks to our 0, not to mention all the QB pressure's they had.

He didn't play good, but there are few people on that offense/defense that played better than him.

But, don't take this into consideration, he's a retard (Hill), with the arm strength of a 2nd grader.
[ Edited by TheG0RE49er on Oct 17, 2009 at 9:36 PM ]
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
The ATL game.

Josh Morgan: Targets 9 Catches 4
V. Davis: T 12 C 5
I. Bruce: T 4 C 0
Link

Compare those numbers to the other games, you can see a difference.

Not only that, their 3 sacks to our 0, not to mention all the QB pressure's they had.

He'd didn't play good, but there are few people on that offense/defense that played better than him.

But, don't take this into consideration, he retard, with the arm strength of a 2nd grader.

retard? wtf man
Originally posted by matt49er:
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
The ATL game.

Josh Morgan: Targets 9 Catches 4
V. Davis: T 12 C 5
I. Bruce: T 4 C 0
Link

Compare those numbers to the other games, you can see a difference.

Not only that, their 3 sacks to our 0, not to mention all the QB pressure's they had.

He'd didn't play good, but there are few people on that offense/defense that played better than him.

But, don't take this into consideration, he retard, with the arm strength of a 2nd grader.

retard? wtf man

he is not talking about you.... he is being sarcastic....there are alot of problems we need to fix first before we change our staring QB.....and drops are some of them, along with the oline.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home