There are 115 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Should Nate Davis be the back-up QB behind Shaun Hill?

Should Nate Davis be the back-up QB behind Shaun Hill?

This kid's better than Alex Smith IMO. He's played well throughout the preseason, I don't remember Alex Smith playing this well in his preseason days. I say put him in as our backup. Alex Smith can be third string.
Great here we go.
Here we go... Nate Davis > Alex Smith

[ Edited by bigmike55 on Sep 4, 2009 at 22:34:09 ]
Originally posted by bigmike55:
Here we go... Nate Davis > Alex Smith

Right. Seriously man I think Nate will be good one day but this is a hopeless discussion. You're a typical reactionary fan. I find them in every fan base. I have friends who are raider fans and when Andrew Walter had a good pre season everyone clamored for him. What happened? 2-14.

I'm just saying I agree with you that Nate is good but you have to put things in perspective. It's like saying Brit Miller is better than Moran Norris or Jo Jon Finley is better than VD. It's senseless. With your logic we should just start Davis and bench Hill too. Cmon man get real.
No.
  • boast
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 73,875
Originally posted by DonJulio:
No.
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Originally posted by bigmike55:
Here we go... Nate Davis > Alex Smith

Right. Seriously man I think Nate will be good one day but this is a hopeless discussion. You're a typical reactionary fan. I find them in every fan base. I have friends who are raider fans and when Andrew Walter had a good pre season everyone clamored for him. What happened? 2-14.

I'm just saying I agree with you that Nate is good but you have to put things in perspective. It's like saying Brit Miller is better than Moran Norris or Jo Jon Finley is better than VD. It's senseless. With your logic we should just start Davis and bench Hill too. Cmon man get real.

Dude, we could have brought in Orton and as soon as Orton would have completed a checkdown, there would be 4 "Lets cut Smith" threads and polls.



-9fA

[ Edited by 9erfanAUS on Sep 4, 2009 at 22:37:04 ]
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,280
No. He should start.
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Originally posted by bigmike55:
Here we go... Nate Davis > Alex Smith

Right. Seriously man I think Nate will be good one day but this is a hopeless discussion. You're a typical reactionary fan. I find them in every fan base. I have friends who are raider fans and when Andrew Walter had a good pre season everyone clamored for him. What happened? 2-14.

I'm just saying I agree with you that Nate is good but you have to put things in perspective. It's like saying Brit Miller is better than Moran Norris or Jo Jon Finley is better than VD. It's senseless. With your logic we should just start Davis and bench Hill too. Cmon man get real.

Regardless of what happened in the preseason, you can't deny the fact and history that Alex Smith stinks it up every time he's on the field. Nate Davis has all the skills and qualities that your beloved Alex Smith has, but Davis is much better.

He's got the big arm, the mobility, but unlike Alex Smith, Davis actually has pocket presence and accuracy. He's not afraid to throw the ball away if there is no play. Alex Smith scrambles around and rolls to his right every time he sees a little pressure and makes a poor decision with the ball.

All I'm saying is Nate Davis has a lot more upside and potential than Alex Smith. We've all seen what Alex Smith can do, (not much). Nate Davis is better than Alex Smith IMO.
Are you kidding? This is silly. No! No! No! Not close!
Originally posted by MadDog49er:
Are you kidding? This is silly. No! No! No! Not close!

And I'm assuming you believe Alex Smith is soooooooooooooo much better than Davis.
Why rush him?
Originally posted by crzy:
No. He should start.

lol i have to agree, he looks better then Hill or Smith at this time. Thats a really bad sign for the 49ers. Nate has a touch pass and a strong arm, something I have not seen in years on this team. I did not like what I saw in per-season. Were in huge trouble.
Originally posted by bigmike55:
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Originally posted by bigmike55:
Here we go... Nate Davis > Alex Smith

Right. Seriously man I think Nate will be good one day but this is a hopeless discussion. You're a typical reactionary fan. I find them in every fan base. I have friends who are raider fans and when Andrew Walter had a good pre season everyone clamored for him. What happened? 2-14.

I'm just saying I agree with you that Nate is good but you have to put things in perspective. It's like saying Brit Miller is better than Moran Norris or Jo Jon Finley is better than VD. It's senseless. With your logic we should just start Davis and bench Hill too. Cmon man get real.

Regardless of what happened in the preseason, you can't deny the fact and history that Alex Smith stinks it up every time he's on the field. Nate Davis has all the skills and qualities that your beloved Alex Smith has, but Davis is much better.

He's got the big arm, the mobility, but unlike Alex Smith, Davis actually has pocket presence and accuracy. He's not afraid to throw the ball away if there is no play. Alex Smith scrambles around and rolls to his right every time he sees a little pressure and makes a poor decision with the ball.

All I'm saying is Nate Davis has a lot more upside and potential than Alex Smith. We've all seen what Alex Smith can do, (not much). Nate Davis is better than Alex Smith IMO.

When Smith throws the ball away, it's a bad thing.

When Davis throws the ball away, it's a good thing.

-9fA
Originally posted by Schulzy:
Why rush him?

being a back up is not rushing him. He won't be starting unless Hill gets hurt. All I'm saying is that he's a better option at backup rather than Alex Bust.