There are 101 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Arguments for Alex Smith and Shaun Hill to Start

  • Kolohe
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 31,378
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Hmmph check out Eli Manning down 41-17 with only 100 yards passing.....that guy sucks right.

Again team effort.

The difference betweein Hill and Manning is that Manning has the ability to get the ball to his WR's.

Well that's not that good of comparison, but what he's trying to point out, is that it's not always on the QB, and even great QB's have a bad game once in a while.

I understand the point he is trying to make. But at least compare QB's that are equal in talent.

Why, talent right now, doesn't have no factor, Mannings O-line is getting schooled, defense and out-coached. Manning is out of sync right now with his receivers and hasn't been able to get comfortable.

"Every QB is the same under pressure" - Tom Jackson

Look at the distribution of the passes from Manning compared to Hill. Manning is completing passes to his WR's. Hill was completing passes to his RB's and TE's.

C'mon are you serious??

And you ask why won't this dumbass fued end between fans, but yet you continue to blame Hill for this past loss and can't even agree that it was a team loss and not solely on one player.

Point is to NYG's loss or losing:

Running game stuffed
Defense being owned
O-line beat up

48-20 and you wanna compare talent vs. Hill. In no way am I comparing Hill and Manning, only the comparison in which the teams are poorly operating. Again I would love to see Manning comeback down by this much, since Hill is incapable of doing it.

I'm not blaming just Hill. Hill can't control the points scored on the defense. It was a team loss. But you must take into account the fact that the QB is usually the face of the franchise. The team wins and the QB gets the credit. The team loses and the QB gets the credit.

The team wins, and the QB gets SOME credit, I still see a lot of Hill sucks comments even when the team wins. The team losses and the QB gets THEE credit, depends, how many picks were contributed (that weren't tipped) and fumbles?? If not, plain and simple it was a team loss.

you say that the QB gets SOME credit. Then why is it that Hill has been labeled as just winning football games?

Gore has been winning football games as well, so has Isaac Bruce and Vernon Davis, see where I'm going with this??

I understand your point. But one person thinking logically doesn't make it the normal ideology amongst fans. Look at the loss against the falcons. Everyone blamed Hill. Why do you think that is? Could it be because the QB is the face of the franchise? It is the same thing as when a company fails. The CEO is the one that gets blamed. Even though it is still a team effort. You catch my drift?

Everyone blamed Hill??? hahaha.... the only people who blamed Hill for that Falcons lost are the SAME 6-10 Hill complainers/Alex fanatics.....and some who just feel the season is lost (5 games into the season ) and would rather give playing time to the other QBs just too see if we need a QB in the 1st round next year.

Everyone blamed Hill?....again

Exactly.
I'm really surprised to see that people actually thought Hill was one the big reasons that we lost the game it speaks volumes.
  • ZRF80
  • Member
  • Posts: 13,551
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Hmmph check out Eli Manning down 41-17 with only 100 yards passing.....that guy sucks right.

Again team effort.

The difference betweein Hill and Manning is that Manning has the ability to get the ball to his WR's.

Well that's not that good of comparison, but what he's trying to point out, is that it's not always on the QB, and even great QB's have a bad game once in a while.

Again, give Smith the same courtesy for the games he played, if you're going to do so for Hill. Otherwise, a clear double-standard is created. It's that simple.

Smith was the scapegoat for a 7-9 (could have been in the playoffs with one more win) season under Nolan, his very first complete season as a starter. It wasn't until later that people seemed to begin to only blame Smith, rather than other parts of the team that were failing so miserably.

Receivers drop balls then? It's Smith's fault.
Receivers drop balls now? It's their fault.


We get a 3 and out then (and especially in '07)? It's Smith fault. All because of him.
We get a 3 and out now? It's Raye's fault.

OL Gives poor protection making the QB unable to escape? Smith's fault/pocket presence sucks/he holds the ball too long.
OL Does the same now? OL sucks, it's not Hill's fault. Leave Hill alone. Give him a break.

Smith does well? It's all Gore or the defense, Smith doesn't do anything.
Hill does well? He's sooo impressive. His "skills" are what help Gore succeed, etc.

It's absolutely absurdity.

Fellas.. I like both QBs, but this is exactly what I've seen across this board for the entire past year, basically. Unquestionably. It's freaking clear as day that this is exactly what has gone for quite some time. It's just not right. It's not right at all.

Who's saying anything like that??

Look at the difference in drop balls, one receiver complains about the pass looking like a punt (I haven't seen that complaint yet) but he can't even catch the ball. Go back and look at the drops from 2006-2007 to this year and compare ball placement.

BTW, where's Hill's 1,700 yard rusher at?? Is it me or did Hill have more rushing yards than our RB this past game?? You simply can't say that this OL is much better than the one that had big Larry Allen in 2006.

And yes I will blame Raye, when he keeps running 1-2 yard rushing calls every 1st and 2nd down, then expect a predictable pass play on 3rd to get us through the game.

Smith had a lot of excellent passes in both years, including one that many remember in the 2007 opener that was dropped in the end zone. Battle's fumble not only cost Smith a TD, it almost cost the 49ers the game. But on top of that, even in games where Smith made a couple not-so-perfect passes, I was not disappointed in the least, because I did NOT expect Smith -- a 21-year old QB starting for the first -- to come and set the world on fire.

The team as a whole -- aside from Gore (who we all know likes Smith) -- offensive players, defense, and coaches included, did not offer a great deal of help to Smith in their contributions to the team's success. I do NOT want to see ANYone try and claim Hill has a worse team that Smith did, just to justify any subpar play by Shaun. If Shaun cannot succeed this year, I will not make excuses for him, nor will I for any other QB.

I did not at all say this year's OL is better. I wasn't comparing statistics or anything or measuring how often each was sacked. My comments were presented situationally, meaning in situations where Hill is sacked or pressured and can't make the throw, the OL seemingly takes all the blame from fans now instead of Hill. Smith gets no such favor. I'm speaking about things that I've been seeing for a loooong time, which stretch far beyond the beginning of this season.

Come on, man. Hill makes some ugly, ugly throws. We all know that. Hill does not throw a pretty ball. I can't agree at all that Hill's "placement" of the ball has been significantly better than Smith's. Such judgments are highly subjective.

If Hill is playing so bad without Gore, why is no one saying "Gore must be carrying Hill. Look at the difference." ? Hill's 1700 yard rusher is on the team. If you were tracking Gore -- after week 2 -- He would've been on pace for almost 1900 yards. But of course, that's skewed, so let's add his 4 yards from week three before getting hurt. Then he's on pace for 1300 yards. Okay, how about we put it in between -- 1600 yards..

Everyone knows Gore is the heart of this team and a big contributor on offense, but please don't downplay any good play by our QB just because of Gore's individual accomplishments.

And now, if Raye is running, does he have less trust in Hill than Turner had in Smith?

So many reasons to believe that this supposed superiority of Hill implied by fans, simply does not exist.

You see we could go round and round with this without EVER coming to an agreement. Sure Smith had a few nice passes here and there, but if you go back and look its always too little too late, in other words when the game is out of reach or when we are behind. Sometimes like Hill, it takes Smith a while to settle down and sometimes he never does, then tends to look indecisive and timid throughout games. Its pretty much the same, with Smith as in Hill, if things aren't clicking on all cylinders as a team Smith more times than not cannot function as you've just seen in Hill this past Sunday.

Why is no one saying Gore is carrying Hill, well, because he isn't, go back and look at the first three games before he was injured. The running game was (is) very inconsistent, and releases no pressure from Hill. Sure Gore had a good game vs. Seattle, but aside from his two 75 yard runs, it was very inconsistent. But nonetheless, Hill does manage to come through with drives every now and then to HELP this team, and yet, I see people even denying that.

Put it this way, Kolohe. The fact that Smith supporters can actually pinpoint each and every accolade that Smith achieved as starter, and also point out each and every "what coulda been's" in Smith's career just goes to show how limited his success really was.

You dont even have to point out why Hill is a better QB, because he has a list of achievements on his resume that dont require defending.
Originally posted by ZRF80:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Hmmph check out Eli Manning down 41-17 with only 100 yards passing.....that guy sucks right.

Again team effort.

The difference betweein Hill and Manning is that Manning has the ability to get the ball to his WR's.

Well that's not that good of comparison, but what he's trying to point out, is that it's not always on the QB, and even great QB's have a bad game once in a while.

Again, give Smith the same courtesy for the games he played, if you're going to do so for Hill. Otherwise, a clear double-standard is created. It's that simple.

Smith was the scapegoat for a 7-9 (could have been in the playoffs with one more win) season under Nolan, his very first complete season as a starter. It wasn't until later that people seemed to begin to only blame Smith, rather than other parts of the team that were failing so miserably.

Receivers drop balls then? It's Smith's fault.
Receivers drop balls now? It's their fault.


We get a 3 and out then (and especially in '07)? It's Smith fault. All because of him.
We get a 3 and out now? It's Raye's fault.

OL Gives poor protection making the QB unable to escape? Smith's fault/pocket presence sucks/he holds the ball too long.
OL Does the same now? OL sucks, it's not Hill's fault. Leave Hill alone. Give him a break.

Smith does well? It's all Gore or the defense, Smith doesn't do anything.
Hill does well? He's sooo impressive. His "skills" are what help Gore succeed, etc.

It's absolutely absurdity.

Fellas.. I like both QBs, but this is exactly what I've seen across this board for the entire past year, basically. Unquestionably. It's freaking clear as day that this is exactly what has gone for quite some time. It's just not right. It's not right at all.

Who's saying anything like that??

Look at the difference in drop balls, one receiver complains about the pass looking like a punt (I haven't seen that complaint yet) but he can't even catch the ball. Go back and look at the drops from 2006-2007 to this year and compare ball placement.

BTW, where's Hill's 1,700 yard rusher at?? Is it me or did Hill have more rushing yards than our RB this past game?? You simply can't say that this OL is much better than the one that had big Larry Allen in 2006.

And yes I will blame Raye, when he keeps running 1-2 yard rushing calls every 1st and 2nd down, then expect a predictable pass play on 3rd to get us through the game.

Smith had a lot of excellent passes in both years, including one that many remember in the 2007 opener that was dropped in the end zone. Battle's fumble not only cost Smith a TD, it almost cost the 49ers the game. But on top of that, even in games where Smith made a couple not-so-perfect passes, I was not disappointed in the least, because I did NOT expect Smith -- a 21-year old QB starting for the first -- to come and set the world on fire.

The team as a whole -- aside from Gore (who we all know likes Smith) -- offensive players, defense, and coaches included, did not offer a great deal of help to Smith in their contributions to the team's success. I do NOT want to see ANYone try and claim Hill has a worse team that Smith did, just to justify any subpar play by Shaun. If Shaun cannot succeed this year, I will not make excuses for him, nor will I for any other QB.

I did not at all say this year's OL is better. I wasn't comparing statistics or anything or measuring how often each was sacked. My comments were presented situationally, meaning in situations where Hill is sacked or pressured and can't make the throw, the OL seemingly takes all the blame from fans now instead of Hill. Smith gets no such favor. I'm speaking about things that I've been seeing for a loooong time, which stretch far beyond the beginning of this season.

Come on, man. Hill makes some ugly, ugly throws. We all know that. Hill does not throw a pretty ball. I can't agree at all that Hill's "placement" of the ball has been significantly better than Smith's. Such judgments are highly subjective.

If Hill is playing so bad without Gore, why is no one saying "Gore must be carrying Hill. Look at the difference." ? Hill's 1700 yard rusher is on the team. If you were tracking Gore -- after week 2 -- He would've been on pace for almost 1900 yards. But of course, that's skewed, so let's add his 4 yards from week three before getting hurt. Then he's on pace for 1300 yards. Okay, how about we put it in between -- 1600 yards..

Everyone knows Gore is the heart of this team and a big contributor on offense, but please don't downplay any good play by our QB just because of Gore's individual accomplishments.

And now, if Raye is running, does he have less trust in Hill than Turner had in Smith?

So many reasons to believe that this supposed superiority of Hill implied by fans, simply does not exist.

You see we could go round and round with this without EVER coming to an agreement. Sure Smith had a few nice passes here and there, but if you go back and look its always too little too late, in other words when the game is out of reach or when we are behind. Sometimes like Hill, it takes Smith a while to settle down and sometimes he never does, then tends to look indecisive and timid throughout games. Its pretty much the same, with Smith as in Hill, if things aren't clicking on all cylinders as a team Smith more times than not cannot function as you've just seen in Hill this past Sunday.

Why is no one saying Gore is carrying Hill, well, because he isn't, go back and look at the first three games before he was injured. The running game was (is) very inconsistent, and releases no pressure from Hill. Sure Gore had a good game vs. Seattle, but aside from his two 75 yard runs, it was very inconsistent. But nonetheless, Hill does manage to come through with drives every now and then to HELP this team, and yet, I see people even denying that.

Put it this way, Kolohe. The fact that Smith supporters can actually pinpoint each and every accolade that Smith achieved as starter, and also point out each and every "what coulda been's" in Smith's career just goes to show how limited his success really was.

You dont even have to point out why Hill is a better QB, because he has a list of achievements on his resume that dont require defending.

yeah, I have always felt this way..... but I understand why they want Alex to work out sooo much... when you see how Matt Ryan played, that is how..I'm sure they envisioned Alex would play or still can if given the opportunity.....

they want Ryan, they want Flacco, they want Manning....for every good QB like these there are 100 more horrible ones who had "upside" and "potential" the problem is, is it worth the wait, that by chance you might find one....losing season after losing season....

I don't feel this way and I believe Singletary doesn't feel this way either...and that is why a player like Shaun is our QB, for now.... who ever is here that will perform.
[ Edited by Afrikan on Oct 18, 2009 at 3:14 PM ]
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Hmmph check out Eli Manning down 41-17 with only 100 yards passing.....that guy sucks right.

Again team effort.

The difference betweein Hill and Manning is that Manning has the ability to get the ball to his WR's.

Well that's not that good of comparison, but what he's trying to point out, is that it's not always on the QB, and even great QB's have a bad game once in a while.

Again, give Smith the same courtesy for the games he played, if you're going to do so for Hill. Otherwise, a clear double-standard is created. It's that simple.

Smith was the scapegoat for a 7-9 (could have been in the playoffs with one more win) season under Nolan, his very first complete season as a starter. It wasn't until later that people seemed to begin to only blame Smith, rather than other parts of the team that were failing so miserably.

Receivers drop balls then? It's Smith's fault.
Receivers drop balls now? It's their fault.


We get a 3 and out then (and especially in '07)? It's Smith fault. All because of him.
We get a 3 and out now? It's Raye's fault.

OL Gives poor protection making the QB unable to escape? Smith's fault/pocket presence sucks/he holds the ball too long.
OL Does the same now? OL sucks, it's not Hill's fault. Leave Hill alone. Give him a break.

Smith does well? It's all Gore or the defense, Smith doesn't do anything.
Hill does well? He's sooo impressive. His "skills" are what help Gore succeed, etc.

It's absolutely absurdity.

Fellas.. I like both QBs, but this is exactly what I've seen across this board for the entire past year, basically. Unquestionably. It's freaking clear as day that this is exactly what has gone for quite some time. It's just not right. It's not right at all.

Who's saying anything like that??

Look at the difference in drop balls, one receiver complains about the pass looking like a punt (I haven't seen that complaint yet) but he can't even catch the ball. Go back and look at the drops from 2006-2007 to this year and compare ball placement.

BTW, where's Hill's 1,700 yard rusher at?? Is it me or did Hill have more rushing yards than our RB this past game?? You simply can't say that this OL is much better than the one that had big Larry Allen in 2006.

And yes I will blame Raye, when he keeps running 1-2 yard rushing calls every 1st and 2nd down, then expect a predictable pass play on 3rd to get us through the game.

Smith had a lot of excellent passes in both years, including one that many remember in the 2007 opener that was dropped in the end zone. Battle's fumble not only cost Smith a TD, it almost cost the 49ers the game. But on top of that, even in games where Smith made a couple not-so-perfect passes, I was not disappointed in the least, because I did NOT expect Smith -- a 21-year old QB starting for the first -- to come and set the world on fire.

The team as a whole -- aside from Gore (who we all know likes Smith) -- offensive players, defense, and coaches included, did not offer a great deal of help to Smith in their contributions to the team's success. I do NOT want to see ANYone try and claim Hill has a worse team that Smith did, just to justify any subpar play by Shaun. If Shaun cannot succeed this year, I will not make excuses for him, nor will I for any other QB.

I did not at all say this year's OL is better. I wasn't comparing statistics or anything or measuring how often each was sacked. My comments were presented situationally, meaning in situations where Hill is sacked or pressured and can't make the throw, the OL seemingly takes all the blame from fans now instead of Hill. Smith gets no such favor. I'm speaking about things that I've been seeing for a loooong time, which stretch far beyond the beginning of this season.

Come on, man. Hill makes some ugly, ugly throws. We all know that. Hill does not throw a pretty ball. I can't agree at all that Hill's "placement" of the ball has been significantly better than Smith's. Such judgments are highly subjective.

If Hill is playing so bad without Gore, why is no one saying "Gore must be carrying Hill. Look at the difference." ? Hill's 1700 yard rusher is on the team. If you were tracking Gore -- after week 2 -- He would've been on pace for almost 1900 yards. But of course, that's skewed, so let's add his 4 yards from week three before getting hurt. Then he's on pace for 1300 yards. Okay, how about we put it in between -- 1600 yards..

Everyone knows Gore is the heart of this team and a big contributor on offense, but please don't downplay any good play by our QB just because of Gore's individual accomplishments.

And now, if Raye is running, does he have less trust in Hill than Turner had in Smith?

So many reasons to believe that this supposed superiority of Hill implied by fans, simply does not exist.

You see we could go round and round with this without EVER coming to an agreement. Sure Smith had a few nice passes here and there, but if you go back and look its always too little too late, in other words when the game is out of reach or when we are behind. Sometimes like Hill, it takes Smith a while to settle down and sometimes he never does, then tends to look indecisive and timid throughout games. Its pretty much the same, with Smith as in Hill, if things aren't clicking on all cylinders as a team Smith more times than not cannot function as you've just seen in Hill this past Sunday.

Why is no one saying Gore is carrying Hill, well, because he isn't, go back and look at the first three games before he was injured. The running game was (is) very inconsistent, and releases no pressure from Hill. Sure Gore had a good game vs. Seattle, but aside from his two 75 yard runs, it was very inconsistent. But nonetheless, Hill does manage to come through with drives every now and then to HELP this team, and yet, I see people even denying that.

You're right. We could go in circles with this. So all I will say is this: I completely disagree that Gore wasn't "carrying" Hill, based only on the standards this board has supplied for a quarterback's success and what they consider "carrying."

Fact: Gore scored every single touchdown we had through the first two games. Three rushing, one receiving.

Fact: 49ers total offense through week 2: 582 yards. Gore's total yards: 294 -- 50.5%

Fact: 49ers total offense in 2006: 4860, Gore's total yards: 2180 -- 44.9%


Gore missed no games due to injury that year.

If Gore is not carrying Hill, Gore was not carrying Alex. But RATHER, they instead both worked together and it was together that they were able to help each other -- and this team -- succeed when they did.

Can we all say that? Or is it going to stay "Anything Hill does well is all Hill" and "Anything Alex has ever done well is attributed to Gore carrying him." -- Because I find that to be unacceptable and an incredibly biased viewpoint.

I'm a fan of this team, not a player. I don't care who is behind center as long as they can lead us to wins. I want our QB to play well enough to win and I'm going to be tough on any guy that is back there. But I just can't sit here and allow people to not only set double standards, but make untrue statements such as "Gore carried Alex. It was all Gore." to write off any sort of success.
[ Edited by OnTheClock on Oct 18, 2009 at 3:26 PM ]
Originally posted by ZRF80:
Originally posted by Kolohe:


You see we could go round and round with this without EVER coming to an agreement. Sure Smith had a few nice passes here and there, but if you go back and look its always too little too late, in other words when the game is out of reach or when we are behind. Sometimes like Hill, it takes Smith a while to settle down and sometimes he never does, then tends to look indecisive and timid throughout games. Its pretty much the same, with Smith as in Hill, if things aren't clicking on all cylinders as a team Smith more times than not cannot function as you've just seen in Hill this past Sunday.

Why is no one saying Gore is carrying Hill, well, because he isn't, go back and look at the first three games before he was injured. The running game was (is) very inconsistent, and releases no pressure from Hill. Sure Gore had a good game vs. Seattle, but aside from his two 75 yard runs, it was very inconsistent. But nonetheless, Hill does manage to come through with drives every now and then to HELP this team, and yet, I see people even denying that.

Put it this way, Kolohe. The fact that Smith supporters can actually pinpoint each and every accolade that Smith achieved as starter, and also point out each and every "what coulda been's" in Smith's career just goes to show how limited his success really was.

You dont even have to point out why Hill is a better QB, because he has a list of achievements on his resume that dont require defending.

And if the fact that Hill fans are comparing what Smith did as a young rookie/sophomore with what Hill is doing now doesn't pinpoint anything then I dunno what else to say.
  • ZRF80
  • Member
  • Posts: 13,551
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by ZRF80:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
Originally posted by backontop:
Originally posted by Kolohe:
Hmmph check out Eli Manning down 41-17 with only 100 yards passing.....that guy sucks right.

Again team effort.

The difference betweein Hill and Manning is that Manning has the ability to get the ball to his WR's.

Well that's not that good of comparison, but what he's trying to point out, is that it's not always on the QB, and even great QB's have a bad game once in a while.

Again, give Smith the same courtesy for the games he played, if you're going to do so for Hill. Otherwise, a clear double-standard is created. It's that simple.

Smith was the scapegoat for a 7-9 (could have been in the playoffs with one more win) season under Nolan, his very first complete season as a starter. It wasn't until later that people seemed to begin to only blame Smith, rather than other parts of the team that were failing so miserably.

Receivers drop balls then? It's Smith's fault.
Receivers drop balls now? It's their fault.


We get a 3 and out then (and especially in '07)? It's Smith fault. All because of him.
We get a 3 and out now? It's Raye's fault.

OL Gives poor protection making the QB unable to escape? Smith's fault/pocket presence sucks/he holds the ball too long.
OL Does the same now? OL sucks, it's not Hill's fault. Leave Hill alone. Give him a break.

Smith does well? It's all Gore or the defense, Smith doesn't do anything.
Hill does well? He's sooo impressive. His "skills" are what help Gore succeed, etc.

It's absolutely absurdity.

Fellas.. I like both QBs, but this is exactly what I've seen across this board for the entire past year, basically. Unquestionably. It's freaking clear as day that this is exactly what has gone for quite some time. It's just not right. It's not right at all.

Who's saying anything like that??

Look at the difference in drop balls, one receiver complains about the pass looking like a punt (I haven't seen that complaint yet) but he can't even catch the ball. Go back and look at the drops from 2006-2007 to this year and compare ball placement.

BTW, where's Hill's 1,700 yard rusher at?? Is it me or did Hill have more rushing yards than our RB this past game?? You simply can't say that this OL is much better than the one that had big Larry Allen in 2006.

And yes I will blame Raye, when he keeps running 1-2 yard rushing calls every 1st and 2nd down, then expect a predictable pass play on 3rd to get us through the game.

Smith had a lot of excellent passes in both years, including one that many remember in the 2007 opener that was dropped in the end zone. Battle's fumble not only cost Smith a TD, it almost cost the 49ers the game. But on top of that, even in games where Smith made a couple not-so-perfect passes, I was not disappointed in the least, because I did NOT expect Smith -- a 21-year old QB starting for the first -- to come and set the world on fire.

The team as a whole -- aside from Gore (who we all know likes Smith) -- offensive players, defense, and coaches included, did not offer a great deal of help to Smith in their contributions to the team's success. I do NOT want to see ANYone try and claim Hill has a worse team that Smith did, just to justify any subpar play by Shaun. If Shaun cannot succeed this year, I will not make excuses for him, nor will I for any other QB.

I did not at all say this year's OL is better. I wasn't comparing statistics or anything or measuring how often each was sacked. My comments were presented situationally, meaning in situations where Hill is sacked or pressured and can't make the throw, the OL seemingly takes all the blame from fans now instead of Hill. Smith gets no such favor. I'm speaking about things that I've been seeing for a loooong time, which stretch far beyond the beginning of this season.

Come on, man. Hill makes some ugly, ugly throws. We all know that. Hill does not throw a pretty ball. I can't agree at all that Hill's "placement" of the ball has been significantly better than Smith's. Such judgments are highly subjective.

If Hill is playing so bad without Gore, why is no one saying "Gore must be carrying Hill. Look at the difference." ? Hill's 1700 yard rusher is on the team. If you were tracking Gore -- after week 2 -- He would've been on pace for almost 1900 yards. But of course, that's skewed, so let's add his 4 yards from week three before getting hurt. Then he's on pace for 1300 yards. Okay, how about we put it in between -- 1600 yards..

Everyone knows Gore is the heart of this team and a big contributor on offense, but please don't downplay any good play by our QB just because of Gore's individual accomplishments.

And now, if Raye is running, does he have less trust in Hill than Turner had in Smith?

So many reasons to believe that this supposed superiority of Hill implied by fans, simply does not exist.

You see we could go round and round with this without EVER coming to an agreement. Sure Smith had a few nice passes here and there, but if you go back and look its always too little too late, in other words when the game is out of reach or when we are behind. Sometimes like Hill, it takes Smith a while to settle down and sometimes he never does, then tends to look indecisive and timid throughout games. Its pretty much the same, with Smith as in Hill, if things aren't clicking on all cylinders as a team Smith more times than not cannot function as you've just seen in Hill this past Sunday.

Why is no one saying Gore is carrying Hill, well, because he isn't, go back and look at the first three games before he was injured. The running game was (is) very inconsistent, and releases no pressure from Hill. Sure Gore had a good game vs. Seattle, but aside from his two 75 yard runs, it was very inconsistent. But nonetheless, Hill does manage to come through with drives every now and then to HELP this team, and yet, I see people even denying that.

Put it this way, Kolohe. The fact that Smith supporters can actually pinpoint each and every accolade that Smith achieved as starter, and also point out each and every "what coulda been's" in Smith's career just goes to show how limited his success really was.

You dont even have to point out why Hill is a better QB, because he has a list of achievements on his resume that dont require defending.

yeah, I have always felt this way..... but I understand why they want Alex to work out sooo much... when you see how Matt Ryan played, that is how..I'm sure they envisioned Alex would play or still can if given the opportunity.....

they want Ryan, they want Flacco, they want Manning....for every good QB like these there are 100 more horrible ones who had "upside" and "potential" the problem is, is it worth the wait, that by chance you might find one....losing season after losing season....

I don't feel this way and I believe Singletary doesn't feel this way either...and that is why a player like Shaun is our QB, for now.... who ever is here that will perform.

The difference being that none of the above listed QBs needed 5 years to strut their stuff. Alex Smith was always a question mark, even during his MVP type season in 2006.
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.
  • ZRF80
  • Member
  • Posts: 13,551
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

I know you're a huge Smith supporter, so what I'll say probably wont make sense to you. To put Smith in NOW is to concede that the season is over. This is not a "lets see what Smith can do" type deal. Odds are that nothing has changed, and he will come out and perform the same way he has been since 2005. At this point, we are still in line to win the division and make a playoff run, and Hill is a part of that.

If we start losing, and the playoffs become a distant memory.....sure, I'll give Smith the benefit of the doubt and expect him to mop up for the remainder of the season. However, this team would be in BIG trouble if Smith was declared starter in 2010, and you could kiss any Superbowl run in the next 3 years goodbye, along with Singletary's career in San Fran.............
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

because we are 49er fans and the 49ers are not out of the playoffs....that is the real reason....

same reason Singletary and the 49ers FO still have and want Shaun back there.....we have a chance at winning the division....and when/if we get to the playoffs, who knows who is clicking on all cylinders by then....

but yes, imo, if we are out of the playoffs then we should play our other QBs to see what we need to do next year.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

There has always been a double standard with Smith. Last year it was JTO and now Hill. The 2007 season when Nolan said Smith wasn't hurt and had him playing after game 3 when the kid really was hurt pretty much did him in. Lot's of people took the last few games Smith was playing with a hurt arm as how he always looked. The kid played well the first 3 games of 2007.

In the end, none of this matters as we do need to see if Smith can play. Even the biggest Hill supporters understand that Hill isn't a long term answer. Hill doesn't have a good arm and it will cost us. At least Smith has a good arm and can make all the NFL throws needed. Let's see if where he is now.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

This is basically what Smith fans are thinking. We're not deluded with this whole "hope for the best, the future will handle itself" mantra that Hill fans have going for them. Alex Smith had several teams interested in him that were willing to pay him a lot more money than the Niners but he stayed loyal to this team and took the pay cut because this is how he feels:

"Having gone through what I've gone through the last couple of years, and being on the sideline, I guess I've got a different perspective on this game. When it came time to restructure the contract, it wasn't anything to do with ego. I just wanted the chance to compete."

This a scholar of life and football who doesn't care about what he gets paid, works 24/7 to improve his game, stays home during bye weeks to help rookie receivers and yet there are still people who think we should get rid of him. It makes no sense. He's 25 now, still very young for a quarterback and Smith fans just feel that we need to see how he's grown over the last 2-3 years. Hill fans can complain all they want, bring up all the statistics they want but they still will never know what abilities Smith does or doesn't have because we haven't seen him play. We have to find out what we have in him because if we don't and end up getting rid of him we may as well be giving Seattle, Arizona, St. Louis or even God forbid, Oakland their future Quarterback...
Originally posted by taney71:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

There has always been a double standard with Smith. Last year it was JTO and now Hill. The 2007 season when Nolan said Smith wasn't hurt and had him playing after game 3 when the kid really was hurt pretty much did him in. Lot's of people took the last few games Smith was playing with a hurt arm as how he always looked. The kid played well the first 3 games of 2007.

In the end, none of this matters as we do need to see if Smith can play. Even the biggest Hill supporters understand that Hill isn't a long term answer. Hill doesn't have a good arm and it will cost us. At least Smith has a good arm and can make all the NFL throws needed. Let's see if where he is now.

I've never seen fans so quick to throw the towel in. I thought we had a winning record.
Originally posted by Mospeed:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

This is basically what Smith fans are thinking. We're not deluded with this whole "hope for the best, the future will handle itself" mantra that Hill fans have going for them. Alex Smith had several teams interested in him that were willing to pay him a lot more money than the Niners but he stayed loyal to this team and took the pay cut because this is how he feels:

"Having gone through what I've gone through the last couple of years, and being on the sideline, I guess I've got a different perspective on this game. When it came time to restructure the contract, it wasn't anything to do with ego. I just wanted the chance to compete."

This a scholar of life and football who doesn't care about what he gets paid, works 24/7 to improve his game, stays home during bye weeks to help rookie receivers and yet there are still people who think we should get rid of him. It makes no sense. He's 25 now, still very young for a quarterback and Smith fans just feel that we need to see how he's grown over the last 2-3 years. Hill fans can complain all they want, bring up all the statistics they want but they still will never know what abilities Smith does or doesn't have because we haven't seen him play. We have to find out what we have in him because if we don't and end up getting rid of him we may as well be giving Seattle, Arizona, St. Louis or even God forbid, Oakland their future Quarterback...

Really? I haven't heard about that? Can you provide a link?
Originally posted by taney71:
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
The double standards applied to the Hill/Smith argument are what bother me. The people that want Smith to get another shot see that Hill is nothing more than a band aid until a better option is found. We need to figure out if Smith can do it or not before the season is over so we know how to approach the draft. If Hill keeps playing as bad as he has, then why not see if we need to get another QB or not? You have to think about the big picture, Hill won't be able to beat teams that can score on the defense, he just isn't the kind of QB that can do this. But go ahead and only look at the short term picture and "Smith sucks" like you think you know what you are talking about.

There has always been a double standard with Smith. Last year it was JTO and now Hill. The 2007 season when Nolan said Smith wasn't hurt and had him playing after game 3 when the kid really was hurt pretty much did him in. Lot's of people took the last few games Smith was playing with a hurt arm as how he always looked. The kid played well the first 3 games of 2007.

In the end, none of this matters as we do need to see if Smith can play. Even the biggest Hill supporters understand that Hill isn't a long term answer. Hill doesn't have a good arm and it will cost us. At least Smith has a good arm and can make all the NFL throws needed. Let's see if where he is now.

Taney, you've touched on exactly what I think the seemingly enmity-possessed attackers of the guy are absorbed in. The Alex Smith of "Torn shoulder ripped off the clavicle" is not the Alex Smith before then, nor is he the Alex Smith of today.

No one has seen the 2009 Regular season Alex Smith. He has not played in a regular season game this year. If he plays a few games this year, we'll be able to say that. But we haven't seen it yet.

Let Hill see if he can sort things out. If he can't and continues to lose -- give Alex a shot, and judge him on what he does this year, with no excuses, just as Hill is -- and should -- be judged.