How do you think Alex Smith did today?

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Dude look at the teams they both played every single one of the teams hill played has a pass d of worse than 20 EVERY TEAM where smith played a 5 ranked pass d and was more productive

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

Here's something for you two to try and understand. The lack of three and outs with Smith in there kept the defense fresh and allowed them to keep one of the most prolific QB's in the history of the league out of the end zone. With the way Hill has played this year, the game would have gotten very ugly, very fast. Keep up the blind hating, spouting stats without understanding the implications, some of us just want the best players playing and Smith has proved he is a better QB. Also, just because someone wants what is best for the team, doesn't mean they are rooting for one player over the team. You guys seriously think Hill would have changed the outcome of this game for the better?

Or, it could be the changes we made on D that allowed our D to play better; but thats not the point of this thread.

You may want to improve you're reading comprehension skills. This post is in regards to how Alex played on Sunday November 1st. Nobody is saying that Hill would have done better and Nobody is hating on Smith. It's all analysis of pure fact. If you can't handle that, then maybe you should try watching golf instead of Football...

in that article by purdy today he said alex was calling all the plays on that great TD drive, maybe he should call all his plays, he sounds like a better play caller than raye is. that drive was masterful

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

First of all, I am not a Smith lover. If you recall ANY of my earlier posts this year about Smith, you will recall ALL I have said about his is that the 49ers need to learn this year if he can lead this team or not. If he can't, they need to draft a QB first day. That is all I have said about Alex Smith. Now if that makes me a "smith lover" then so be it.

However, your contention that if Shaun Hill were playing in yesterday's game, he would have done something different and had better stats is hard to comprehend. First and foremost, Hill could not physically have completed at least 1/3 of the throws Smith made, and most of those were on that two-minute drill at the end of the first half. Take those away, and consider how little the 49ers were able to run other than Gore's 64 yarder, and it is likely the 49ers would have been blown out by enough to make those who bet Indy to cover felt very smug about their winnings.

Finally, Smith kept the 49ers in a game where Hill did not have the ability to match in any way.

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Dude look at the teams they both played every single one of the teams hill played has a pass d of worse than 20 EVERY TEAM where smith played a 5 ranked pass d and was more productive

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

Here's something for you two to try and understand. The lack of three and outs with Smith in there kept the defense fresh and allowed them to keep one of the most prolific QB's in the history of the league out of the end zone. With the way Hill has played this year, the game would have gotten very ugly, very fast. Keep up the blind hating, spouting stats without understanding the implications, some of us just want the best players playing and Smith has proved he is a better QB. Also, just because someone wants what is best for the team, doesn't mean they are rooting for one player over the team. You guys seriously think Hill would have changed the outcome of this game for the better?

Or, it could be the changes we made on D that allowed our D to play better; but thats not the point of this thread.

You may want to improve you're reading comprehension skills. This post is in regards to how Alex played on Sunday November 1st. Nobody is saying that Hill would have done better and Nobody is hating on Smith. It's all analysis of pure fact. If you can't handle that, then maybe you should try watching golf instead of Football...

D_niner easily demonstrating how to grossly misuse and misinterpret sports statistics to support a flawed arguement....

At this point, taking into account that this was the Colts D, (not the Cards, Rams, or Seahawks) Alex Smith is easily playing better than Hill. Yes he plays a "different" game, but if you are implying that Smith couldn't/wouldn't make all the throws that Hill would have in that situation than you are missing the point. Smith is clearly "better" than Hill, and the only way you can argue that they are similar is to do what you just did: grossly take stats out of context.

[ Edited by norcal49er864 on Nov 2, 2009 at 13:31:15 ]

Originally posted by Joecool:
To be a devil's advocate, even Hill had about 3 games where he had one great drive. Smith, in this last game, only had one great drive.

Like everyone has been saying, it's Jimmy Raye more than anything. Yes, we are passing more but guess what type of passes we are throwing on 1st or 2nd down: quick 1-yarders for a 3 yard gain.

Jimmy Raye sucks and it won't be too long before one of the two happens:

1. Norv is fired and we hire him which is highly unlikely
2. We promote the QB coach and pray he isn't a Hostler.

No way Singletary brings in a guy who is going to introduce an entirely new offense.

I don't think we need an entirely new offense. We just need a better blending of runs and passes.

That having been said, I am assuming Raye has some sweeps, stretch runs reverses in his playbook that will spread the defense horizontally. It is his play selection that is constipating the offense.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

First of all, I am not a Smith lover. If you recall ANY of my earlier posts this year about Smith, you will recall ALL I have said about his is that the 49ers need to learn this year if he can lead this team or not. If he can't, they need to draft a QB first day. That is all I have said about Alex Smith. Now if that makes me a "smith lover" then so be it.

However, your contention that if Shaun Hill were playing in yesterday's game, he would have done something different and had better stats is hard to comprehend. First and foremost, Hill could not physically have completed at least 1/3 of the throws Smith made, and most of those were on that two-minute drill at the end of the first half. Take those away, and consider how little the 49ers were able to run other than Gore's 64 yarder, and it is likely the 49ers would have been blown out by enough to make those who bet Indy to cover felt very smug about their winnings.

Finally, Smith kept the 49ers in a game where Hill did not have the ability to match in any way.

I never said that. If you want to debate the issue, please don't make s**t up.

I don't think the argument that Hill and Smith have different game but both give the same result holds water. For those who like stats, just look at the Houston game, 1st half and 2nd half. Night and Day. Hill and Smith.

Hill has plateaued, hit his ceiling and can't give anymore to this team than what he has given. Smith can give more and improving.

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

I call bullcrap! If Hill were quaterbacking yesterday the Colt defense would have been ALL OVER our receivers because they know he can't get the ball downfield. Their D-line would have been licking their chops at the prospect of Hill standing back there like a statue. If Hill was inthere his interceptions would have been around 2-4, his fumbles 1-2, and the game would have been a Colt blowout, just like the last 2 games Hill started.

I call for a shovel.


I'm out for the day. You guys carry on. I have to go make some money.

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

Ronnie Lott wanted Smith over Hill too. I will take a HOF DB's opinion over a zoner's.

Nobody is saying that Smith is going to be great. We are saying that he is showing more poise than he ever has, and more than Hill did for the first 6 years. The fact of the matter is Hill didnt play the Colts, so who knows what would have happened. I would be willing to bet that Gore doesnt break that run, Hill takes more sacks, and probably gets picked off more.

Stating the obvious here....Alex is not a 3time SuperBowl MVP returning from an injury and starting for the first time in 2 yrs.
Alex had his chances in the past, and latest, lost out to Shaun Hill after TC ended. Expectations for Alex were pretty low when he took over from Shaun Hill two weeks ago.
So, bottom line, the bar is low. With that, yes, Alex is playing well, and has exceeded expectations...especially 2nd half of the Texans game.

I think he did ok Nothing great nothing bad. He held his own hope he continues to improve.

Originally posted by norcal49er864:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Dude look at the teams they both played every single one of the teams hill played has a pass d of worse than 20 EVERY TEAM where smith played a 5 ranked pass d and was more productive

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

Here's something for you two to try and understand. The lack of three and outs with Smith in there kept the defense fresh and allowed them to keep one of the most prolific QB's in the history of the league out of the end zone. With the way Hill has played this year, the game would have gotten very ugly, very fast. Keep up the blind hating, spouting stats without understanding the implications, some of us just want the best players playing and Smith has proved he is a better QB. Also, just because someone wants what is best for the team, doesn't mean they are rooting for one player over the team. You guys seriously think Hill would have changed the outcome of this game for the better?

Or, it could be the changes we made on D that allowed our D to play better; but thats not the point of this thread.

You may want to improve you're reading comprehension skills. This post is in regards to how Alex played on Sunday November 1st. Nobody is saying that Hill would have done better and Nobody is hating on Smith. It's all analysis of pure fact. If you can't handle that, then maybe you should try watching golf instead of Football...

D_niner easily demonstrating how to grossly misuse and misinterpret sports statistics to support a flawed arguement....

At this point, taking into account that this was the Colts D, (not the Cards, Rams, or Seahawks) Alex Smith is easily playing better than Hill. Yes he plays a "different" game, but if you are implying that Smith couldn't/wouldn't make all the throws that Hill would have in that situation than you are missing the point. Smith is clearly "better" than Hill, and the only way you can argue that they are similar is to do what you just did: grossly take stats out of context.

You are missing the point of the thread. Its on how Smith played November 1st 2009. Looking at the stats, they are identical to what Hill has put up all year.

So, how exactly is that a misuse of stats? Are you saying that the cards didn't try that hard or that the Vikings are that much worse then the Colts D? This is like saying that the Falcons O is so much better then the Colts because of how bad the Falcons kicked our ass. Just because you say it, doesnt make is so...

Also, I never said or implied Hill could make those throws... Where do you guys come up with this crap?

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
I don't think the argument that Hill and Smith have different game but both give the same result holds water. For those who like stats, just look at the Houston game, 1st half and 2nd half. Night and Day. Hill and Smith.

Hill has plateaued, hit his ceiling and can't give anymore to this team than what he has given. Smith can give more and improving.

I doubt Houston spent much time game planning against Smith; but, I could be wrong...

Originally posted by TheRatMan13:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

Ronnie Lott wanted Smith over Hill too. I will take a HOF DB's opinion over a zoner's.

Nobody is saying that Smith is going to be great. We are saying that he is showing more poise than he ever has, and more than Hill did for the first 6 years. The fact of the matter is Hill didnt play the Colts, so who knows what would have happened. I would be willing to bet that Gore doesnt break that run, Hill takes more sacks, and probably gets picked off more.

And I'm only saying that Smith played below average (as NFL QB's go) yesterday. That's all. I don't know why this is such a problem for some folks on here...

Originally posted by norcal49er864:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by 49ersalldaway126:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by Super5:

Originally posted by D_Niner:

Originally posted by D_Niner:
Meh...

He did about the same as Hill has all season. Less than 60% completions, less than 200 yards passing, 1TD and 1 Int... We need a real effin QB instead of these losers...

Oh, and a 74.7 QB rate... We could insert these numbers directly into Hill's stat sheet and no one would know the difference.

If you look at the stats for this game it looks like S.Hill on paper but if you watched the actual game it's obvious there's a difference and who the better QB is.If Raye didn't go vanilla most of the game Smith's stats would not only look "prettier" they would have won a game they had no business even being competitive in.

Dude look at the teams they both played every single one of the teams hill played has a pass d of worse than 20 EVERY TEAM where smith played a 5 ranked pass d and was more productive

Smith's stats for the year in 1 1/2 games:

34-54 for 404yds 4td 2int 7.5avg 63%comp 95.0 rtg


Hill's stats for the year in 6 games:

87-155 for 943yds 5td 2int 6.1avg 56.1%comp 79.6 rtg


At this point Smith's stats look more favorable

The question was how he did today. Not last week, not 2006 but today. Now today, he played at the same level as Shaun Hill.

Look, all I'm saying is that this kid has not put up numbers that we as fans should be content with (just for the record neither has Hill). This type of QB play will not get us wins against good teams. Our D is just not good enough to carry poor QB play

You're overreacting he didn't play "poor" against Indy-not great,not poor but ok.

I'm overreacting? His performance was below average for NFL standards. Below average = poor to me. Just ok would = average and Good would be above average.

Look at it this way, there are several who consider Hill's QB accomplishments to be poor. Maybe this is why he is not our starting QB anymore? Alex had a Shaun Hill type of day (look at the stats). Now if Hill's stats are poor and Alex put up just as dismal numbers, then Alex's performance was poor.

There are also some who would add the four easily catchable balls that were dropped to Smith's rating and see that he did better than Manning...but not everyone chooses to look beyond pure stats.

And there are those of you who only choose to make excuses. The fact is that all QB's have receivers who drop good passes. None of them get a little star by their name to say "but 4 of his drops weren't his fault". Smith had a Shaun Hill stat type of day. I hope he gets better and I think he can; but, his performance yesterday wasn't all that great....

Yes, all QBs have some drops, even Manning had some passes dropped. However, the passes the Colts didn't hold were not even remotely as easy to catch as the simple drop by Bruce where even Tim Ryan said it was one he should catch 999 times out of 1,000, OR the EASY drop by Davis on a throw that hit him in the numbers, OR the time Davis didn't even make an attempt to drag his left foot to stay in bounds.

As to the comparison with Shaun Hill; that is almost laughable. There were 5-7 completions Smith had that were on passes Hill could not have even gotten to the receivers, hence, the comparison to Hill is invalid. That long completion to Crabtree is a ball Hill is not capable of throwing. Four sideline completions were rockets that the DB knocks down or even picks if Hill is throwing his wounded ducks.

You appear to be missing a big part of why Smith is in the game in the first place. Hill would not have even come close to Smith's numbers in that game yesterday. He just isn't capable of making most of those throws.

Bottom line: Alex Smith kept the 49ers in a game yesterday against a team that looks like a Super Bowl team this year, certainly one of the three best in the league. Shaun Hill was not capable of doing that. Numbers be damned, Hill could not have done what Smith did...PERIOD.

Again with the excuses. Do you even realize Hill and Smith play a different type of game? Of course Smith made throws that Hill wouldn't have been able to. If Hill was in, his completion % would most likely be higher than Smiths was. This is because they play 2 different types of games... I'm not arguing that Hill would have done better or should even be the starter. All I'm saying is that at the end of the day, Smith did not net much better than what Hill has done for us all year. How hard is this for you Smith lovers to understand?

Here's something for you two to try and understand. The lack of three and outs with Smith in there kept the defense fresh and allowed them to keep one of the most prolific QB's in the history of the league out of the end zone. With the way Hill has played this year, the game would have gotten very ugly, very fast. Keep up the blind hating, spouting stats without understanding the implications, some of us just want the best players playing and Smith has proved he is a better QB. Also, just because someone wants what is best for the team, doesn't mean they are rooting for one player over the team. You guys seriously think Hill would have changed the outcome of this game for the better?

Or, it could be the changes we made on D that allowed our D to play better; but thats not the point of this thread.

You may want to improve you're reading comprehension skills. This post is in regards to how Alex played on Sunday November 1st. Nobody is saying that Hill would have done better and Nobody is hating on Smith. It's all analysis of pure fact. If you can't handle that, then maybe you should try watching golf instead of Football...

D_niner easily demonstrating how to grossly misuse and misinterpret sports statistics to support a flawed arguement....

At this point, taking into account that this was the Colts D, (not the Cards, Rams, or Seahawks) Alex Smith is easily playing better than Hill. Yes he plays a "different" game, but if you are implying that Smith couldn't/wouldn't make all the throws that Hill would have in that situation than you are missing the point. Smith is clearly "better" than Hill, and the only way you can argue that they are similar is to do what you just did: grossly take stats out of context.

Actually, his argument is valid if I am understanding it correctly. He is not saying that Hill could have done better than Smith; he is simply saying that Smith had a Hill type of day; less than average statistics and a lost. You can't dispute that and blaming everyone else to explain the facts represents a poor assessment.

What many up here fail to understand is that Raye and Sing have actually put Smith in a position to grow and succeed. Smith had some physical as well as mental challenges that they have done a very good job of managing. They ensured that he would not face too much pressure; too soon that could have likely devastated his career. As he grows and continues to gain confidence, his statistics and wins will grow. But, yesterday's performance was just "ok."