Arguments for Alex Smith and Shaun Hill to Start

Mommy and Daddy are fighting again about Smith and Hill. Make them stop!!

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

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.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

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.

fact : 2009 season the D is carried the team to victories
Fact: in 2006 our D was so s**tty which is why we overpaid nate cleements and drafted willis and our o line was horrible we got staley

the team hill is playing with now is better offensivly and defensivly then what smith had his whole career x10

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

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.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

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.

fact : 2009 season the D is carried the team to victories
Fact: in 2006 our D was so s**tty which is why we overpaid nate cleements and drafted willis and our o line was horrible we got staley

the team hill is playing with now is better offensivly and defensivly then what smith had his whole career x10

Defensively yes, but offensively I'm not so sure. I don't think Hill has the O-weapons he needs to truly succeed, starting with the o-line of course.

All things being equal, I think Hill still wins out, at least for now. It's been one bad loss, I think everyone is overreacting.

Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:

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.

I am not convinced that a qb playing like Hill is is capable of getting us to the playoffs, you guys act like it is a sure thing that he will. I am not giving up on the season, the guys that want to leave a QB in that limits the offense seem like the ones giving up. You have to get the ball to the wide receivers, Hill isn't doing this with any consistency, not one of our wideouts are ranked in the top 90 receivers. You can try to blame that all on playcalling or line play, but a lot of it is Hill checking down even when receivers are open. He cannot make the throws that a starting QB has to make. I am in no way saying Smith is a sure thing, just that how do we know he isn't (which we don't), if he doesn't get a shot? If the line keeps playing like it has been, it might become a moot point as Hill will end up injured.

Hill-ucinating. LOL. This thread delivers.

Originally posted by truekingcarlos:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

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.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

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.

fact : 2009 season the D is carried the team to victories
Fact: in 2006 our D was so s**tty which is why we overpaid nate cleements and drafted willis and our o line was horrible we got staley

the team hill is playing with now is better offensivly and defensivly then what smith had his whole career x10

Defensively yes, but offensively I'm not so sure. I don't think Hill has the O-weapons he needs to truly succeed, starting with the o-line of course.

All things being equal, I think Hill still wins out, at least for now. It's been one bad loss, I think everyone is overreacting.

Hill doesn't have the offensive weapons needed to succeed are you serious? Bruce, Morgan, Battle, VD, Gore, Walker, Jones(if he ever makes it on the field) Crabtree(when he FINALLY makes it on the field) Smith had Antonio Bryant, Battle, Lloyd, D-Drop and Gore.

We need a QB that can extend the play when the offense o-line collapses, that makes smart decisions has the arm to make the accurate throw and none of the Two Qb's in our roster have the intangibles to do so. You wonder why we have sucked over the years just look at all the good teams they have good if not great QB's. We currently have below averages QB's in our roster we need help.

^^^ Seems to me that we have that guy already. His name is Alex Smith^^^

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

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.

Yeah exactly
never mind the 49ers offense is bottom ranked,Hill is doing just fine and as long as he continues to the 49ers will make the playoffs nooo problem

okey dokey

They will. And it's not because Hill is the most accurate or the most mobile or that he moves the chains. It's because he doesnt create turnovers, something we cannot say for Alex "my hands are too small thats why I fumble" Smith....

Sorry, the Defense and Gore wins..........

There fixed.

~Ceadder

I consder myself a Hill supporter and still think he deserves to start based on his cumulative play. That being said, I just wish some of you would just admit you have a personal bias against Alex Smith and therefore you have a double standard.

It's clear and when it gets brought up you will say "well yeah he's a first rounder so there are diff standards." Yet the very next sentence you will say he's fifth round talent...?

I just don't understand why we can't all agree that we've done a very poor job of building this team the right way from the beginning...in the trenches. Until we have a decent o line and proper blocking and play calling it won't matter whether it's Shaun Hill, Alex Smith, or Eli Manning.

The best bet is neither is a long term answer. All I want is to see Smith start 1..maybe 2 games and see what he can do. At that point we can seriously evaluate both QB's and make the correct decision for the future, maybe we keep both, maybe we keep 1, or maybe we release both. But we need to know what we have, so going into the 2010 and 2011 drafts we can target the correct positions.

Originally posted by jreff22:
The best bet is neither is a long term answer. All I want is to see Smith start 1..maybe 2 games and see what he can do. At that point we can seriously evaluate both QB's and make the correct decision for the future, maybe we keep both, maybe we keep 1, or maybe we release both. But we need to know what we have, so going into the 2010 and 2011 drafts we can target the correct positions.

What exactly does this mean? The best bet is neither. How would that be our best bet?

Why would anyone want this guy who has a squatty stance which makes him 5'10 or shorter in the pocket and horrible mechanics. Hill bends his knees so far down that he can barely see over our o-lineman to make a pass, then when he's unable to see over the lineman he just runs into Baas and blames the o-lineman for giving up a sack.

I mean just look at his mechanics compared to Smith's:





Smith would be able to clearly be able to see over his o-lineman and possibly take less sacks with this height and mobility improvement.

Originally posted by Mospeed:
Why would anyone want this guy who has a squatty stance which makes him 5'10 or shorter in the pocket and horrible mechanics. Hill bends his knees so far down that he can barely see over our o-lineman to make a pass, then when he's unable to see over the lineman he just runs into Baas and blames the o-lineman for giving up a sack.

I mean just look at his mechanics compared to Smith's:





Smith would be able to clearly be able to see over his o-lineman and possibly take less sacks with this height and mobility improvement.

LOL, seriously?

You just took good pictures of Alex and bad pictures of Shaun, and put them side by side.

How are those bad pictures of Shaun Hill? Thats what his mechanics look like, just the fact that you claim they look bad proves my point and I was only using them as a reference. I've had plenty of other posts in this thread.

this in thread.....we compliment Alex Smith's mechanics