We need four QBs on the roster

Originally posted by danimal:
with this o-line, I would say 4 QB's would not be too irresponsible.

Where do you come up with this stuff? Martz is no longer having the QBs execute 7 step drops, and Keasey won't be on the field. Add to that they will be running alot.

Okay, I guess it's just fine for Niner Talk.

I'm starting to think that Huard was signed as a training camp QB so they could have a veteran QB who won't stall the development of the other players like the WRs. Meanwhile, they can teach Nate Davis the position at a pace that he's comfortable with.

4 QBs would be incredibly stupid.

It's simple.

If we're in bad enough shape to need the 3rd stringer to start and win a game we may as well start getting the mock drafts ready.

Also Davis isn't a complete retard. The guy can play and he can make the throws. He'll make more mistakes than a guy like Huard but imo you don't take up a roster spot from another player who can help the team on special teams or as a backup at a position where he would actually contribute in a game.

A 3rd string QB usually just holds the clipboard the whole season.

Also it's simple if we try to put Davis on the practice squad - he'll get picked up.

If we let Huard go he may still be around should the horrible happen and we need him.

I'll be very upset if we keep 4 qbs. We're not good enough everywhere else to do that.

Originally posted by genus49:
4 QBs would be incredibly stupid.

It's simple.

If we're in bad enough shape to need the 3rd stringer to start and win a game we may as well start getting the mock drafts ready.

Also Davis isn't a complete retard. The guy can play and he can make the throws. He'll make more mistakes than a guy like Huard but imo you don't take up a roster spot from another player who can help the team on special teams or as a backup at a position where he would actually contribute in a game.

A 3rd string QB usually just holds the clipboard the whole season.

Also it's simple if we try to put Davis on the practice squad - he'll get picked up.

If we let Huard go he may still be around should the horrible happen and we need him.

I'll be very upset if we keep 4 qbs. We're not good enough everywhere else to do that.

Too add to the bolded you might as well let Davis come in and get some experience in a wasted season at that point. You never know he could shock the world by coming in and tearing it up and we remain competative for a play off spot. Win Win situation.

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by genus49:
4 QBs would be incredibly stupid.

It's simple.

If we're in bad enough shape to need the 3rd stringer to start and win a game we may as well start getting the mock drafts ready.

Also Davis isn't a complete retard. The guy can play and he can make the throws. He'll make more mistakes than a guy like Huard but imo you don't take up a roster spot from another player who can help the team on special teams or as a backup at a position where he would actually contribute in a game.

A 3rd string QB usually just holds the clipboard the whole season.

Also it's simple if we try to put Davis on the practice squad - he'll get picked up.

If we let Huard go he may still be around should the horrible happen and we need him.

I'll be very upset if we keep 4 qbs. We're not good enough everywhere else to do that.

Too add to the bolded you might as well let Davis come in and get some experience in a wasted season at that point. You never know he could shock the world by coming in and tearing it up and we remain competative for a play off spot. Win Win situation.

Yea pretty much. When the season goes down the s**tter you may as well see what your young players can do to see if you have something there.

I only want 3 quarterbacks on the roster. Davis won't clear waivers without getting snapped up. We can always find a Huard type in FA if needed.

Originally posted by MiamiNiner:
Nate Davis, practice squad. Will keep three QB on roster

I think some team would steal him from us. We should try to keep him on the active roster.

so is this the new Hill thread?


we must be allowed to discuss the QB's somewhere on this "forum"

Cut Huard. Pointless signing.

Nate Davis is our #3.

only prob with cutting Huard we lose a veteran experience. i know that's not saying much, but hey he's got more game experience than Davis.

Heck, the Colts only keep 2 QBs on their roster.

I say keep Davis over Huard as it is just a tad unclear if either Hill or Smith can be a long term solution at QB, and therefore you need a young QB developing. I mean, seriously, if either Hill or Smith were the future, you think it would have taken so long to decide on a starter. And even then, it appears as though Hill backed into it. It didn’t look like he definitely showed he was the one who should start. It just so happens that Smith didn’t either. It looks to me that they chose the QB who they thought was less likely to lose a game. The future needs to be someone who can win a game.

So with that in mind, and with all of his potential, I would think keeping Davis and working with him over the year to develop him would be a priority.

No we don't

Originally posted by jimmythegreekjr:
The question is why.

The answers:

1) It doesn't hurt

It does hurt takes up a valuable roster spot

2) If we only ahd Hill only (but not Smith) and the Hill got injured, we'd have Huard as starter and Davis as back up to carry us through the season. How far could they carry the team?

Teams don't make final roster moves based on what if injuries.

3) We don't want to risk putting Davis on the practice squad and another team claiming him

Don't keep him and dump Huard dudes like him are a dime a dozen and wont be on a team unless someone gets hurt.

4) Singletary basically gave the Job to Hill, because there was no separation between Smith and Hill (No confidence in either QB at this point). Because of this uncertainty, we need more options at QB during the season in case both Smith and Hill are ineffective.

Bottom line teams don't carry four QB's its a waist of roster space. On game day you can only have 45 active players so you have to set who the 8 inactive players are 7 if you have a 3rd QB.

Originally posted by nvninerfan1:

Originally posted by danimal:
with this o-line, I would say 4 QB's would not be too irresponsible.

Where do you come up with this stuff? Martz is no longer having the QBs execute 7 step drops, and Keasey won't be on the field. Add to that they will be running alot.

Okay, I guess it's just fine for Niner Talk.

uhh, because unlike most zoners I don't have amnesia about past seasons especially when the team has not changed that much.

Zoners like you amaze me....you have so much hate for Martz you somehow erase how bad the Niners were before he ever even arrived.

Try asking Alex and Dilfer how good this line is. And since then really the players have only changed by a couple of guys.

I come up with this stuff because I am skeptical that all of our woes can be pinned on Martz, or Hostler, or any single person.

Guys like you are the same every August. In 12 months you will be spouting the same crap because that horrible Jimmy Raye was kicked out of town.

Oh and just saying you are going to run alot, does not mean you are going to run alot. The only way you can truly be a running team is you have to be able to gash the defense on 1st down, oh and news flash....D cords have no fear on first down of a pathetic pass play they are going to stack the box...then you are in 2 and long....guess who WON"T be running the next 2 plays?

Try paying attention this year buddy. Here is what we do in August, cut an OK 4th QB....then later in the season, we are forced to employ a 4th QB(who is worst then the dude we cut) because of injuries.

So don't act like the Niners will never need to employ a 4th QB this season, when in fact it is pretty likely we will.

Cut Huard, and if we need him later and he's not available we can call Dilfer. Or Dorsey or Rattay or Pickett. Garcia will probably be available by then.