Crabtree the Cure for Alex?

Originally posted by GORE-ILLA:

Originally posted by Psinex:
I seem to remember a lot of receivers dropping balls that practically hit them right in the hands a couple years ago. We haven't had a sure-handed receiver since drafting Alex Smith until we signed Isaac Bruce.

If Alex gets a receiver that will fight for the ball, imagine how many yards he could rack up. And that's what Michael Crabtree brings to the table. I think Shaun Hill is a solid quarterback, but Alex Smith has the tools to be great like Peyton Manning. Is Crabtree his Marvin Harrison or Reggie Wayne? Time will tell.

I CAN'T WAIT FOR THE PRE-SEASON!!! We can finally see what we have in Crabtree. It's like waiting for your Lamborghini to get fixed. Or your girlfriend to come home with new implants.

man i get so tired of the alex smith kool-aid drinkers..every season

Unfortunately, it flows like water in here.

There is no fix for Alex!

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:
There is no fix for Alex!

+10000000000

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by GORE-ILLA:
why is hill not the long term answer???

because he is not Alex....and he doesn't remind these followers of QBs like Payton, Brady, etc.

they want to be like other teams....have a "franchise" QB....but the NFL does not always work like that.....time will just be passing by as teams wait for a "savior" a young one at that....there have been PLENTY of teams who have drafted a young qb, wanting him to be a savior, over paying for him, sacrificing season for him, and just hoping he will pan out.....where as you have other teams that are just trying to win and get better.....they usually make the playoffs and are always in the thick of things.

I believe Shaun Hill can be our Rich Gannon....at one point, Gannon, with the Raidas was one of the best QBs in the league...everything was clicking for him....he didn't have a strong arm....but he knew where to throw the ball and, more importantly, was a Great team leader.....I remember him dissecting Pittsburgs feared 3-4 defense....when they were perceived to be unstoppable.

I also remember him setting the record for interceptions thrown in a Superbowl...so what's your point?

...after resting for a couple of hours and rereading my post....I'll edit it to just this. Besides that on superbowl against a coach who knew every about the QB, Gannon had a great career with the Raiders...he was indeed one of the best QBs during that era....Shaun Hill plays similar to Gannon and seems like he is a team leader.....

if Shaun can play the way Gannon played those years, I would be EXTREMELY ecstatic. That Raider team was very flexible....they were a great running team first but could quickly switch to a 5 wide, no huddle team that made the Steelers look foolish and Rich Gannon had a big part in that.....and when you look at last year....some thought that Hill would struggle with Martz offense....but he also excelled in that type of offense as well.....

I dunno Af, call me crazy but I wouldn't say that Shaun excelled in Martz Offense if it was scaled back so he could run it. You do that for rookies not 6 year Veterans.

So I apologize if I offend anyone but I'm not buyin into that. I think that had Alex been healthy that he would have been the better option to run Martz Offense than Hill was.This is not taking anything away from Shaun but Smith at least has the arm to be a deep threat and Martz Offense needs a deep threat passer to make it work.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by niner4life21:
What pisses me off is that Alex supporters will say s**t like, " oh we just want the best QB to be on the field and we wouldn't care if its Hill or Smith as the starter".

Then its the same people who never give credit to Hill for his wins and good play.

They say that hill never beat any good teams. Ok, so did Smith beat any good teams? the answer is no.

Wow, on one hand you complain about people not supporting anyone who wears a 49er uniform( smith), then you completely dismiss Hills 18 tds 9ints compared to Smiths 19 tds and 31 ints.

but but but but Smith played on bad teams and Hill had.......exactly, Hill had a bunch of rooks/2nd year players, and an ancient isaac bruce. and don't forget crazy ass martz and the 7 step drop.

Lets just say that Hill did have an amazing team that he played on... Is that still a good reason to say that smith is a better player?

No, im not saying that Smith can't be good, but as of now he sucks balls, injury or not, cuz when he was healthy, he also sucked balls, too.

So you ASSUME that I am a Smith guy because I am right on point with that stance?

Look, I am what I am and that is fair to midlan on this issue.

But I will compare Hill to drugs to an addict. After that first high it will NEVER get any better. Hill being the drug and you being the addict. You will sit and wait for Hill to take effect only to be disappointed and left wanting more.

While I on the other hand will be happy in the knowledge that I said no to drugs.

I already know that Hill will be the Starter barring a complete breakdown in upper management. But the difference between the Hill addicts and me is that I do want competition at EVERY spot including QB. Competition makes for a better team. And if Smith just happens to get better and PLAY better when given the opportunity then it's a Win/Win situation for all concerned. Right?

Or do you LIKE 9er players to fail?

~Ceadder

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by niner4life21:
What pisses me off is that Alex supporters will say s**t like, " oh we just want the best QB to be on the field and we wouldn't care if its Hill or Smith as the starter".

Then its the same people who never give credit to Hill for his wins and good play.

They say that hill never beat any good teams. Ok, so did Smith beat any good teams? the answer is no.

Wow, on one hand you complain about people not supporting anyone who wears a 49er uniform( smith), then you completely dismiss Hills 18 tds 9ints compared to Smiths 19 tds and 31 ints.

but but but but Smith played on bad teams and Hill had.......exactly, Hill had a bunch of rooks/2nd year players, and an ancient isaac bruce. and don't forget crazy ass martz and the 7 step drop.

Lets just say that Hill did have an amazing team that he played on... Is that still a good reason to say that smith is a better player?

No, im not saying that Smith can't be good, but as of now he sucks balls, injury or not, cuz when he was healthy, he also sucked balls, too.

So you ASSUME that I am a Smith guy because I am right on point with that stance?

Look, I am what I am and that is fair to midlan on this issue.

But I will compare Hill to drugs to an addict. After that first high it will NEVER get any better. Hill being the drug and you being the addict. You will sit and wait for Hill to take effect only to be disappointed and left wanting more.

While I on the other hand will be happy in the knowledge that I said no to drugs.

I already know that Hill will be the Starter barring a complete breakdown in upper management. But the difference between the Hill addicts and me is that I do want competition at EVERY spot including QB. Competition makes for a better team. And if Smith just happens to get better and PLAY better when given the opportunity then it's a Win/Win situation for all concerned. Right?

Or do you LIKE 9er players to fail?

~Ceadder

But you know my friend that it is impossible for you to want both Smith and Hill to succeed.Let me enlighten you to the inner workings of the shallow mind...If you like Smith,you must hate Hill,because the factional jackasses say so.You aren't allowed to like both of them,you have to be a sheep and do what they do because they are too smart to possibly be wrong.You must choose sides either Smith sucks or you hate Hill,there is no middle ground...So get with the program,choose a side and start hating one of your teams QB's today!

(because it makes so much sense)


Personally I love that we have competition at QB,and not that phony crap like last year.It can only push both of them to put forth the maximum effort,and that can only be good for the team.

You see, Memphis, the powerful minds around here think that if you like both players and want either to succeed, or if you harbor optimistic hopes for this coming season, this is tantamount to mass suicide and murder on the order of the Jonestown Massacre, hence the term "drinking the koolaid."

As you can see, it's a very insightful and penetrating argument - Niner fans are committing suicide and poisoning their children as a show of support for the Niners as we speak, all over the Bay Area. Now, those are dedicated fans!

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by BobS:
The cure for Alex would be to have the 1985 Bears, 2000 Ravens, or the 2002 Buccaneers around him, 3 teams that won it all while having a mediocre or less QB at
the helm.

I understand that the ultimate goal is to win the SB but you are acting like Smith is the only player on the offense

But...but it is so much easier to just"Alex Smith sucks"than to actually put the effort into asking oneself why he hasn't succeeded.I mean why would anyone want to think that any of the other 10 guys on offense weren't getting it done either?It is so much easier to blame it on the #1 pick just because his name isn't Rodgers.It is not possible that the team had the #1 pick to spend on Smith because they were the worst team in the NFL...that just makes no sense.So I will stick to blaming one person for the teams failures because I am too lazy/ignorant to realize it is a team sport and that all parts have to execute the play or it becomes impossible for the play to work.


Makes complete sense to me...how bout you guys?

Spot on!! Excellent post.

This waste of space comes to mind:

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by niner4life21:
What pisses me off is that Alex supporters will say s**t like, " oh we just want the best QB to be on the field and we wouldn't care if its Hill or Smith as the starter".

Then its the same people who never give credit to Hill for his wins and good play.

They say that hill never beat any good teams. Ok, so did Smith beat any good teams? the answer is no.

Wow, on one hand you complain about people not supporting anyone who wears a 49er uniform( smith), then you completely dismiss Hills 18 tds 9ints compared to Smiths 19 tds and 31 ints.

but but but but Smith played on bad teams and Hill had.......exactly, Hill had a bunch of rooks/2nd year players, and an ancient isaac bruce. and don't forget crazy ass martz and the 7 step drop.

Lets just say that Hill did have an amazing team that he played on... Is that still a good reason to say that smith is a better player?

No, im not saying that Smith can't be good, but as of now he sucks balls, injury or not, cuz when he was healthy, he also sucked balls, too.

So you ASSUME that I am a Smith guy because I am right on point with that stance?

Look, I am what I am and that is fair to midlan on this issue.

But I will compare Hill to drugs to an addict. After that first high it will NEVER get any better. Hill being the drug and you being the addict. You will sit and wait for Hill to take effect only to be disappointed and left wanting more.

While I on the other hand will be happy in the knowledge that I said no to drugs.

I already know that Hill will be the Starter barring a complete breakdown in upper management. But the difference between the Hill addicts and me is that I do want competition at EVERY spot including QB. Competition makes for a better team. And if Smith just happens to get better and PLAY better when given the opportunity then it's a Win/Win situation for all concerned. Right?

Or do you LIKE 9er players to fail?

~Ceadder

But you know my friend that it is impossible for you to want both Smith and Hill to succeed.Let me enlighten you to the inner workings of the shallow mind...If you like Smith,you must hate Hill,because the factional jackasses say so.You aren't allowed to like both of them,you have to be a sheep and do what they do because they are too smart to possibly be wrong.You must choose sides either Smith sucks or you hate Hill,there is no middle ground...So get with the program,choose a side and start hating one of your teams QB's today!

(because it makes so much sense)


Personally I love that we have competition at QB,and not that phony crap like last year.It can only push both of them to put forth the maximum effort,and that can only be good for the team.

I so agree with Memphis on this one.

I'll just come right out and say I THINK Smith has more upside than Hill, but today Hill has proven more than Smith...

BUT NOT THAT MUCH MORE.

Why do I think this? Because your BELOVED COACH thinks this. How can you say Hill is hands down better when before we even had an OC in-house, your fearless leader wouldn't even guarantee the guy who helped us win our last few games (and cement the new coach's hire) would be the starter going into next season. How can anyone here say Hill is decidedly better when the new, hand-picked OC has said "I haven't seen enough on either.... I need to see them in game situations...." Surely after 5 seasons between the both of them if one was clearly better, there would have been a clear decision right? Furthermore, the flirt with Warner proves that you don't need "film" to make that decision - who here believes Warner, Smith and Hill would have been in a QB competition? No takers? I didn't think there would be.

It's clear that despite all Hill has done, he still hasn't decidedly silenced his doubters at 4949 Centennial. It's also clear that Smith isn't so hopeless that there's no chance he can prove to be the starter. This also seems to be the current thinking at HQ.

I support the team getting better - which is the philosophy of your coach and your GM. Despite thinking Smith has more potential, doesn't somehow slight that Hill has delivered more over his recent tenure.

Debates about what shoulda, coulda, woulda for Smith and Hill will never be resolved because all are based on speculations of the hypothetical (lol). I'm much more interested in what do the 49ers think TODAY versus last year, two or three seasons ago, etc.

My 2 cents.

I would venture to say that the flirt with Warner might have been more about driving up his price for the Cards,I am not so sure that he would be a fit here,he is too easily injured and our line is unproven.Just my opinion though GM.

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by niner4life21:
What pisses me off is that Alex supporters will say s**t like, " oh we just want the best QB to be on the field and we wouldn't care if its Hill or Smith as the starter".

Then its the same people who never give credit to Hill for his wins and good play.

They say that hill never beat any good teams. Ok, so did Smith beat any good teams? the answer is no.

Wow, on one hand you complain about people not supporting anyone who wears a 49er uniform( smith), then you completely dismiss Hills 18 tds 9ints compared to Smiths 19 tds and 31 ints.

but but but but Smith played on bad teams and Hill had.......exactly, Hill had a bunch of rooks/2nd year players, and an ancient isaac bruce. and don't forget crazy ass martz and the 7 step drop.

Lets just say that Hill did have an amazing team that he played on... Is that still a good reason to say that smith is a better player?

No, im not saying that Smith can't be good, but as of now he sucks balls, injury or not, cuz when he was healthy, he also sucked balls, too.

So you ASSUME that I am a Smith guy because I am right on point with that stance?

Look, I am what I am and that is fair to midlan on this issue.

But I will compare Hill to drugs to an addict. After that first high it will NEVER get any better. Hill being the drug and you being the addict. You will sit and wait for Hill to take effect only to be disappointed and left wanting more.

While I on the other hand will be happy in the knowledge that I said no to drugs.

I already know that Hill will be the Starter barring a complete breakdown in upper management. But the difference between the Hill addicts and me is that I do want competition at EVERY spot including QB. Competition makes for a better team. And if Smith just happens to get better and PLAY better when given the opportunity then it's a Win/Win situation for all concerned. Right?

Or do you LIKE 9er players to fail?

~Ceadder

So you will blindly support Smith just because he has more "potential". Well obviously he has more potential, more talent, more upside, because thats why he was taken as the number 1 pick!!!!

But Hill, on the other hand, has produced, has shown that he can win, no matter what the circumstances.

now you will argue that he didn't look perfect, his arm is weak, Smith has more upside all that BS, blah blah blah.

But why do you play this game? To win every f**king time you go out there!

Smith might have the more upside, but Hill has "it". And if you don't know what 'it" is, it is having that will to win the game when it is on the line. To rally your team back when you're down in the 4th quarter. To take control of the huddle and lead your team to victory.

Now don't get me wrong, Hill ain't no Joe Montana. And I'm also not saying that its just his leadership skills that prove him as the better player....You see him with his accuracy, and mobility, pocket presence, and all the other things that SMITH JUST DOESN'T HAVE.

Alex needs to show leadership ability then, from there, he can salvage his career

Originally posted by niner4life21:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by niner4life21:
What pisses me off is that Alex supporters will say s**t like, " oh we just want the best QB to be on the field and we wouldn't care if its Hill or Smith as the starter".

Then its the same people who never give credit to Hill for his wins and good play.

They say that hill never beat any good teams. Ok, so did Smith beat any good teams? the answer is no.

Wow, on one hand you complain about people not supporting anyone who wears a 49er uniform( smith), then you completely dismiss Hills 18 tds 9ints compared to Smiths 19 tds and 31 ints.

but but but but Smith played on bad teams and Hill had.......exactly, Hill had a bunch of rooks/2nd year players, and an ancient isaac bruce. and don't forget crazy ass martz and the 7 step drop.

Lets just say that Hill did have an amazing team that he played on... Is that still a good reason to say that smith is a better player?

No, im not saying that Smith can't be good, but as of now he sucks balls, injury or not, cuz when he was healthy, he also sucked balls, too.

So you ASSUME that I am a Smith guy because I am right on point with that stance?

Look, I am what I am and that is fair to midlan on this issue.

But I will compare Hill to drugs to an addict. After that first high it will NEVER get any better. Hill being the drug and you being the addict. You will sit and wait for Hill to take effect only to be disappointed and left wanting more.

While I on the other hand will be happy in the knowledge that I said no to drugs.

I already know that Hill will be the Starter barring a complete breakdown in upper management. But the difference between the Hill addicts and me is that I do want competition at EVERY spot including QB. Competition makes for a better team. And if Smith just happens to get better and PLAY better when given the opportunity then it's a Win/Win situation for all concerned. Right?

Or do you LIKE 9er players to fail?

~Ceadder

So you will blindly support Smith just because he has more "potential". Well obviously he has more potential, more talent, more upside, because thats why he was taken as the number 1 pick!!!!

But Hill, on the other hand, has produced, has shown that he can win, no matter what the circumstances.

now you will argue that he didn't look perfect, his arm is weak, Smith has more upside all that BS, blah blah blah.

But why do you play this game? To win every f**king time you go out there!

Smith might have the more upside, but Hill has "it". And if you don't know what 'it" is, it is having that will to win the game when it is on the line. To rally your team back when you're down in the 4th quarter. To take control of the huddle and lead your team to victory.

Now don't get me wrong, Hill ain't no Joe Montana. And I'm also not saying that its just his leadership skills that prove him as the better player....You see him with his accuracy, and mobility, pocket presence, and all the other things that SMITH JUST DOESN'T HAVE.

Did you not watch the first Arizona game in 07?Smith did exactly that,despite the dropped TD pass that was perfectly thrown to D-Drop.You guys act like Smith has never shown any hint of reaching his potential,which is complete bull.If Hill is such a sure thing,why is there even a QB competition going on?You think Singletary wouldn't have named him the starter already if it were as clear cut as you seem to think it is?Hill is pretty good and has done well for what he is,but the best thing for this team would be to have Smith become what we need,a franchise QB.Not saying that is a sure thing to happen by any means,I am not a blind supporter of anything except for the team,but for you guys to think that Smith will never be any better than he has been to date is just ludicrous.

Originally posted by Psinex:
Alex Smith has the tools to be great like Peyton Manning.

Check the reords Hill is a better winning percentage and gives all hes got.

Smith needs to make quick decisive reads.

I hope Smith can do it but know Hill hase proven it 2 years in a row with mid season take overs which speak volumes.

we'll know soon enough