I know 99% of the Zone hate Lynch but this is worth reading RE:oFfense (UPDATED)

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:


Martz was completely out of hand. He started a QB who essentially lost any hope for us winning several games due to his bad decision making, and Martz appeared to have ZERO inclination to bench him. Read: "We are not a f**king charity." It appeared Martz was happy to keep his boy in there, even at the expense of us becoming a charity. Side note: Singletary didn't put up with that s**t for even half a game.

Just thought I would mention that.

Please. Everyone that attended training camp said that Hill and Smith looked awful in practice and JTO was by far the better of them.

Just thought I would mention that.

Your point doesn't hold much water in the grand scheme of things. The guy was a complete f**k up and Martz didn't seem to mind one bit, whcih puts him right there as well.

Lets tell the truth about all this Martz/ JTO BS..

Martz raved about him.

Martz thought he might even be elite one day.

Martz doesn't want a game manager with a noodle arm, he wants somebody who is accurate as hell with zip, and can do it with the deeper routes.

Martz was a complete f**k up of an OC as well, ranking 22nd in points per game...absolutely pathetic. Unless of course, your into being 22nd ranked and going home in January.

When was the last f**king time Martz has done anything worth a s**t in this league? I'll tell you when...around the last time we were doing something worth a s**t as well, the Mooch years...which was a long long long time ago.

Just thought I would mention that.

Actually he played pretty well in the early games of the season. Heck, I could remember this board going crazy about him. Like I said, he was the better QB when the season began, by far.

And like I pointed out, 22nd in points was the best we had in years. But obviously, there's only much you can do with little talent.

And MArtz made that game manager with a noodle arm look like the real thing. With only one year of experience in a VERY complicated offense.

If he had him looking so good, how come he had to beg Singletary not to bench his ass?

Lets tell the truth:

The truth is, Hill did just enough and very little more. That's been the general consensus ever since he's had his shot. Hence, he wasn't even named the 2009 starter at the end of the season, and the drafting of Nate Davis.

Doing just enough is a LONG way from "looking like the real thing".

I said he "looked like the real thing", never said he was the "real thing", especially since I don't believe he is. Heck, if our offensive line were not so crappy I would actually be in favor of drafting a QB with one of our 1st round picks. Still, remember that Hill won a extension based on what he did last year.

And as for JTO, like I sadi, he started remarkably well. His game against Seattle (the first one obviously) was excellent. Then, he went downhill in October, which forced Singletary to make the change. However, t's not too hard to understand why Martz didn't want to do that: Hill is known for being a poor practice player, and given it was his first year in a new offense (and a very complicated one), it's easy to deduce he was stinking up in practice. But Singletary knew that that was his pattern.

Just to sum up my position:

I think our talent on O is very poor. We desperately need an answer at QB and some positions at OL. But I also think that we yhave a excellent D, and if we had an OC capable of at least fielding a servicable O (like Martz or Turner), that could earn us some estra Ws.

JTO did not have an excellent game in Seattle. He had 321 yards and a TD. He also had a fumble at a critical time (he recovered it thankfully) and he also took eight sacks. As we all became aware of as time progressed, JTO was part of the problem with the sacks, he held onto the ball way too long and was indifferent to the approaching pressure. In hindsight, he was doing in the Seattle game as well. As it was, we scraped by for the win on a field goal. Note: 321 passing yards and one passing TD. Once again, I repeat.... Martz offense was unstoppable from our 20 to their 40, and they sucked ass royally from there.

I am with you on your summation of your position, I have the same except:

I still don't know where you are getting this thing about our offense being serviceable under Martz. He simply did not score enough points to say that he was guiding a serviceable offense, and that was because his offense sucked ass inside the opponents 40. I really don't see how Mart'z is an improvement over Raye, I just don't see it. Maybe it just looks prettier? And, I do believe, Norv is stinking it up pretty bad down there in SD, which says a lot because the talent level on that O is WAY higher than what we have here. He has River's, he has Sproles, he has LT, he has Gates...much more talent than here..... and he is still stinking it up big time. And you think he can somehow do more with less, here? I just don't see it.

Originally posted by Blitz:

I am with you on your summation of your position, I have the same except:

I still don't know where you are getting this thing about our offense being serviceable under Martz. He simply did not score enough points to say that he was guiding a serviceable offense, and that was because his offense sucked ass inside the opponents 40. I really don't see how Mart'z is an improvement over Raye, I just don't see it. Maybe it just looks prettier? And, I do believe, Norv is stinking it up pretty bad down there in SD, which says a lot because the talent level on that O is WAY higher than what we have here. He has River's, he has Sproles, he has LT, he has Gates...much more talent than here..... and he is still stinking it up big time. And you think he can somehow do more with less, here? I just don't see it.

Of course he did. Our offense did not score enough points to be called a GOOD offense, but it was certainly serviceable.

And Martz is an improvement over Raye across the board. Yards, points, 3rd conversions, you name it.

To me what you're saying basically is, you're either Bill Walsh or you're garbage. And my point is that there are several different degrees of good/bad.

Here's my proposition: Martz/Turner are much better than Raye/Hostler.

Now, pointing out flaws in Martz/Turner's offenses is by no means a refutation of the proposition above. The refutation would be to either make the argument that Raye's offense is better or at least just as good and I'm saying that it can't be done.

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:

I am with you on your summation of your position, I have the same except:

I still don't know where you are getting this thing about our offense being serviceable under Martz. He simply did not score enough points to say that he was guiding a serviceable offense, and that was because his offense sucked ass inside the opponents 40. I really don't see how Mart'z is an improvement over Raye, I just don't see it. Maybe it just looks prettier? And, I do believe, Norv is stinking it up pretty bad down there in SD, which says a lot because the talent level on that O is WAY higher than what we have here. He has River's, he has Sproles, he has LT, he has Gates...much more talent than here..... and he is still stinking it up big time. And you think he can somehow do more with less, here? I just don't see it.

Of course he did. Our offense did not score enough points to be called a GOOD offense, but it was certainly serviceable.

And Martz is an improvement over Raye across the board. Yards, points, 3rd conversions, you name it.

To me what you're saying basically is, you're either Bill Walsh or you're garbage. And my point is that there are several different degrees of good/bad.

Here's my proposition: Martz/Turner are much better than Raye/Hostler.

Now, pointing out flaws in Martz/Turner's offenses is by no means a refutation of the proposition above. The refutation would be to either make the argument that Raye's offense is better or at least just as good and I'm saying that it can't be done.

That's not the refutation I was proposing. Nowhere did I say that Rayes offense was better, or propose to prove that it was. You have spun it around. This is what I said: I just don't see how Martz offense would be better than Rayes. Raye may suck, but Martz sucked too, there isn't a f**king difference in my book. They both suck. Why do you insist on trying to make Martz out to be something other than a different shade of suck? You might have a valid argument to me if Martz had actually guided the offense to more points scored last year, or even YPG, then I may believe that he could actually produce more wins than some other person who sucked too. A suck is a suck bro, they are the same.

Now, all the stats you listed as "better" are complete and utter pointless stats in the grand scheme. The only stat that truly matter's is the points for/points against. That is because teams are awarded a win based SOLEY on that one stat and not a single damn thing else. Third downs, yards, you name it, none of them mean jack s**t if you don't put points on the board, and Martz failed to do that, considerably, ranking 22nd. In short, he sucked in the primary stat he was responsible for, points for.

Now Hostler. There's a lot of mumbo jumbo blah blah blah going on this board about Raye/Hostler comparison's. It's complete BS. Raye's offense is NOWHERE as bad as the Hostler offense. Not even close. That was the worst ranked offense in 49er history, and Raye's offense is nowhere near that. Using the primary offensive stat:

Hostler: 219 points for the entire year.
Raye: 112 over four games.

Do the rough math in the head and Rayes offense would end up with 448 points for the season, over double what Hostler's offense produced.

Again, the Hostler/Raye comparison's are complete BS in light of the primary offensive stat used.

I will say one thing, they are both ugly offenses.

Now, out of curiosity, where does Raye's offense stack up with Martz's in the points department?

Originally posted by Blitz:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:

I am with you on your summation of your position, I have the same except:

I still don't know where you are getting this thing about our offense being serviceable under Martz. He simply did not score enough points to say that he was guiding a serviceable offense, and that was because his offense sucked ass inside the opponents 40. I really don't see how Mart'z is an improvement over Raye, I just don't see it. Maybe it just looks prettier? And, I do believe, Norv is stinking it up pretty bad down there in SD, which says a lot because the talent level on that O is WAY higher than what we have here. He has River's, he has Sproles, he has LT, he has Gates...much more talent than here..... and he is still stinking it up big time. And you think he can somehow do more with less, here? I just don't see it.

Of course he did. Our offense did not score enough points to be called a GOOD offense, but it was certainly serviceable.

And Martz is an improvement over Raye across the board. Yards, points, 3rd conversions, you name it.

To me what you're saying basically is, you're either Bill Walsh or you're garbage. And my point is that there are several different degrees of good/bad.

Here's my proposition: Martz/Turner are much better than Raye/Hostler.

Now, pointing out flaws in Martz/Turner's offenses is by no means a refutation of the proposition above. The refutation would be to either make the argument that Raye's offense is better or at least just as good and I'm saying that it can't be done.

That's not the refutation I was proposing. Nowhere did I say that Rayes offense was better, or propose to prove that it was. You have spun it around. This is what I said: I just don't see how Martz offense would be better than Rayes. Raye may suck, but Martz sucked too, there isn't a f**king difference in my book. They both suck. Why do you insist on trying to make Martz out to be something other than a different shade of suck? You might have a valid argument to me if Martz had actually guided the offense to more points scored last year, or even YPG, then I may believe that he could actually produce more wins than some other person who sucked too. A suck is a suck bro, they are the same.

Now, all the stats you listed as "better" are complete and utter pointless stats in the grand scheme. The only stat that truly matter's is the points for/points against. That is because teams are awarded a win based SOLEY on that one stat and not a single damn thing else. Third downs, yards, you name it, none of them mean jack s**t if you don't put points on the board, and Martz failed to do that, considerably, ranking 22nd. In short, he sucked in the primary stat he was responsible for, points for.

Now Hostler. There's a lot of mumbo jumbo blah blah blah going on this board about Raye/Hostler comparison's. It's complete BS. Raye's offense is NOWHERE as bad as the Hostler offense. Not even close. That was the worst ranked offense in 49er history, and Raye's offense is nowhere near that. Using the primary offensive stat:

Hostler: 219 points for the entire year.
Raye: 112 over four games.

Do the rough math in the head and Rayes offense would end up with 448 points for the season, over double what Hostler's offense produced.

Again, the Hostler/Raye comparison's are complete BS in light of the primary offensive stat used.

I will say one thing, they are both ugly offenses.

Now, out of curiosity, where does Raye's offense stack up with Martz's in the points department?

And how many of those 112 points came out of ST and DEF? And you're forgetting something crucial: Raye has by far the better D, which sends his unit to the field more frequently, giving him more chance of scoring.

You can't simply look at the points and draw a conclusion from there.

And for the last time, a suck is NOT a suck. 22 sucks, but sucks less than 32, that sucks more than 25 that sucks more than 10 and so on.

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:

Originally posted by Brazilian49er:

Originally posted by Blitz:

I am with you on your summation of your position, I have the same except:

I still don't know where you are getting this thing about our offense being serviceable under Martz. He simply did not score enough points to say that he was guiding a serviceable offense, and that was because his offense sucked ass inside the opponents 40. I really don't see how Mart'z is an improvement over Raye, I just don't see it. Maybe it just looks prettier? And, I do believe, Norv is stinking it up pretty bad down there in SD, which says a lot because the talent level on that O is WAY higher than what we have here. He has River's, he has Sproles, he has LT, he has Gates...much more talent than here..... and he is still stinking it up big time. And you think he can somehow do more with less, here? I just don't see it.

Of course he did. Our offense did not score enough points to be called a GOOD offense, but it was certainly serviceable.

And Martz is an improvement over Raye across the board. Yards, points, 3rd conversions, you name it.

To me what you're saying basically is, you're either Bill Walsh or you're garbage. And my point is that there are several different degrees of good/bad.

Here's my proposition: Martz/Turner are much better than Raye/Hostler.

Now, pointing out flaws in Martz/Turner's offenses is by no means a refutation of the proposition above. The refutation would be to either make the argument that Raye's offense is better or at least just as good and I'm saying that it can't be done.

That's not the refutation I was proposing. Nowhere did I say that Rayes offense was better, or propose to prove that it was. You have spun it around. This is what I said: I just don't see how Martz offense would be better than Rayes. Raye may suck, but Martz sucked too, there isn't a f**king difference in my book. They both suck. Why do you insist on trying to make Martz out to be something other than a different shade of suck? You might have a valid argument to me if Martz had actually guided the offense to more points scored last year, or even YPG, then I may believe that he could actually produce more wins than some other person who sucked too. A suck is a suck bro, they are the same.

Now, all the stats you listed as "better" are complete and utter pointless stats in the grand scheme. The only stat that truly matter's is the points for/points against. That is because teams are awarded a win based SOLEY on that one stat and not a single damn thing else. Third downs, yards, you name it, none of them mean jack s**t if you don't put points on the board, and Martz failed to do that, considerably, ranking 22nd. In short, he sucked in the primary stat he was responsible for, points for.

Now Hostler. There's a lot of mumbo jumbo blah blah blah going on this board about Raye/Hostler comparison's. It's complete BS. Raye's offense is NOWHERE as bad as the Hostler offense. Not even close. That was the worst ranked offense in 49er history, and Raye's offense is nowhere near that. Using the primary offensive stat:

Hostler: 219 points for the entire year.
Raye: 112 over four games.

Do the rough math in the head and Rayes offense would end up with 448 points for the season, over double what Hostler's offense produced.

Again, the Hostler/Raye comparison's are complete BS in light of the primary offensive stat used.

I will say one thing, they are both ugly offenses.

Now, out of curiosity, where does Raye's offense stack up with Martz's in the points department?

And how many of those 112 points came out of ST and DEF? And you're forgetting something crucial: Raye has by far the better D, which sends his unit to the field more frequently, giving him more chance of scoring.

You can't simply look at the points and draw a conclusion from there.

And for the last time, a suck is NOT a suck. 22 sucks, but sucks less than 32, that sucks more than 25 that sucks more than 10 and so on.

We are going to have to agree to disagree here. There comes a point where a suck is a suck. Martz was at that point that I call a suck. He sucked before he got here too.

So, for the last time, a suck is a suck and I don't give two s**ts the shade of the stink. You might, but I damn sure don't. So, agree to disagree.

Now we can go on arguing the intricacies and get nowhere. Things like "Raye has a better defense so on the filed more" etc. Fine, dandy, and even swell.... AND it's still not going to change the fact that Martz didn't score a lot of points, and that he sucked once he got to the opponents 40.

Now, we can also go into the stats this year about defensive and ST points you mentioned. Fine, swell, peachy even. My belief is it's still not going to change the fact that Rayes offense is nowhere near as bad as what Hostler's was, so far, in the primary stat that matter's for an offense points for. I don't have the time nor the inclination to go sort that stat out, nor the intricacies of it, nor the inclination to explain the reasoning behind why that stat is the beginning and the end to figuring what offense is worth a s**t and what offense isn't.... so if you want to believe otherwise, you can go and do the work to prove to me otherwise, and I will gladly submit I was wrong about that, should you do that. Absent of that, we will just have to agree to disagree, as I WILL hold my position that Hostler's offense was much worse, until proven otherwise. However, just to be clear, Norv, Hostler, Martz and the current (subject to change) Raye offense, suck. They all suck when you get down to it, and only Raye has the chance to prove otherwise, about 12 games worth of chance. The rest can kiss my ass as far as getting another crack it, because, they sucked in the past and I'm confident they will suck again.


Just to be clear, for the last time...a suck is a suck is a suck, and I don't give two s**ts about the shade of stink with each. Trading one suck for another doesn't make a lick of common sense to me. Hence, I don't buy the Martz or Norv woulda coulda shoulda making this offense anything other than a suck, past nor future. We will have to agree to disagree.

[ Edited by Blitz on Oct 13, 2009 at 20:04:20 ]