There are 146 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Arguments for Alex Smith and Shaun Hill to Start

Originally posted by oldman9er:
Aside from all the hate and BS... here's what I would want to happen.

option #1 - SF has this extra time to get work in. Glad to hear Alex Smith is staying to get in the extra work, and Shaun Hill really should as well. Anyway, If during this next week and a half, Shaun Hill's mental and physical game has not looked sharp... and Alex does? ... then SF makes up the "minor injury excuse" and Alex Smith is replacing the "injured" starter vs Houston. If Alex has a good/great game, then Hill is still "injured" and they are being careful with the injury by resting him another week. Alex plays well/great again, and then the starter is now Smith.

option #2 - Shaun Hill starts @ Houston, but is on a very short leash. If Hill is playing poorly by halftime?... He sits and Alex comes in.

option #3 - Hill starts @ Houston and gets the whole game. If he sucks (week 5) or underperforms (weeks 1-4) as he has... a new starter is named early in the week.

option #4 - Hill starts... plays better than he has been... and continues to start... but there is still a leash.


I think Hill playes mediocre but efficient while Gore gets 18+ carries and the defense plays well after being destroyed by Atlanta.

But I do agree that another bad game by Hill will raise some serious concerns and questions about his standing. One bad game is one thing but 2 or 3 consecutive bad games during this part of the season is unacceptable.
Whats funny about all this is we are not asking the QB to do much. Fact is, even the rookie Nate Davis could hand the ball off to Gore and make some passes. Why when we have Alex that can throw deep do you keep a guy that can't throw but 20 yards and even that 20 yard pass is UGLY? We are not asking our QB to be P. Manning so why not just put in the more athletic, better passer and see what happens with Gore, V. Davis, Bruce, Morgan and Crabby! It might be a surprise. We at least need somebody that can throw it deep... If we have too.
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
I dont think it matters too much who plays. Both QB's are not good at all, plus the o-line stinks so any QB put back there wont fare very well. Lets just hope Gore can carry us to the playoffs

The running game has been a problem just as much as pass protection. If it wasn't for Gores two big runs we would be near the bottom in the league in rushing offense.
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

[ Edited by dirtysouthniner on Oct 14, 2009 at 13:56:47 ]
What is really funny is how people are making excuses for Hills poor performance that they called alexcuses when applied to Smith. If you are going to criticize one for something, it should also apply to the other, right? I expected more from Hill, I was very happy with the way he played last year other than the St. Louis game @ St. Louis. Now he seems to have regressed, no pocket presence, poor accuracy, under throwing dump offs...etc. Then these people have the nerve to criticize anyone that has enough depth of thought to realize that the teams Smith played on weren't nearly as good as the one Hill has been sucking it up on. Then we get the certified "football geniuses" that want to use Flacco/Ryan/Sanchez as a measuring stick, like the 2005 Niners roster had anywhere near the talent as either the Ravens/Falcons or the Jets. It is this kind of ignorance that makes these peoples arguments not only invalid, but laughable.
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

you are right!! im sorry
Originally posted by maximill15:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

you are right!! im sorry

Starting Davis means we've given up on the season. It's all about winning now.
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by maximill15:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

you are right!! im sorry

Starting Davis means we've given up on the season. It's all about winning now.

exactly and starting smith means we want the first pick in the draft if you catch my drift!
NEWS BREAK: Singletary says that Smith got reps with the 1st team because Hill's arm was sore from throwing so many punts (I mean passes).

http://blog.pressdemocrat.com/49ers/2009/10/singletary-talks-o-line-sheets-rossum.html
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
What is really funny is how people are making excuses for Hills poor performance that they called alexcuses when applied to Smith. If you are going to criticize one for something, it should also apply to the other, right? I expected more from Hill, I was very happy with the way he played last year other than the St. Louis game @ St. Louis. Now he seems to have regressed, no pocket presence, poor accuracy, under throwing dump offs...etc. Then these people have the nerve to criticize anyone that has enough depth of thought to realize that the teams Smith played on weren't nearly as good as the one Hill has been sucking it up on. Then we get the certified "football geniuses" that want to use Flacco/Ryan/Sanchez as a measuring stick, like the 2005 Niners roster had anywhere near the talent as either the Ravens/Falcons or the Jets. It is this kind of ignorance that makes these peoples arguments not only invalid, but laughable.

I think you are right. Each player should be judge by what they accomplish on the field. What I am still waiting for is someone to give me some statistic or any data that shows why Smith is the better choice for this team. I know a lot of people are knocking Hills arm and passes, but I can clearly remember Alex having a lot trouble with his accuracy. There were many times where receivers were running wide open and he would over throw them. I know you like me don't believe either one of these guys is our future, but at least we know Hill is capable of leading this team. Throwing Smith out there just to see what happens is a sign of desperation. Especially for a guy who has never shown the ablility to make things happen.
Originally posted by maximill15:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

you are right!! im sorry

Smith has had a few games with a rating over 100, so obviously you are just talking out of your ass. Statements like this, which you think are cute, just show you for what you are. You have to bring more to the table than inaccurate rhetoric if you want grown men to take you seriously.
“I think we’ll be fine. When we get everyone on the page and stop making small mistakes – the offense will be fine,” Gore said.

If Frank says we'll be fine then I believe him.
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by maximill15:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

you are right!! im sorry

Smith has had a few games with a rating over 100, so obviously you are just talking out of your ass. Statements like this, which you think are cute, just show you for what you are. You have to bring more to the table than inaccurate rhetoric if you want grown men to take you seriously.

I can't waste solid arguments on a subject that is a dumb as calling for smith to start I'm sorry! The guy is a bust, as much as i wanted him to succeed, he finds a way to fail!
Originally posted by Memphis9er:
Originally posted by maximill15:
Originally posted by dirtysouthniner:
Originally posted by maximill15:
I could understand a Nate davis over hill and smith argument, as idiotic as it sounds because he possess all the tools, except experience, but smith over hill is sorry! He had ONE good game in seattle and thats it!

How can you say such a thing??? It was a good quarter in one game.

you are right!! im sorry

Smith has had a few games with a rating over 100, so obviously you are just talking out of your ass. Statements like this, which you think are cute, just show you for what you are. You have to bring more to the table than inaccurate rhetoric if you want grown men to take you seriously.

Nice, I agree... Smith can't do any worse than what we have seen.

Maybe we can trade Smith and Hill to Oakland for Russell... That guy is awesome!