What do the 9ers have to do to beat Da Bears?

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Hill didn't win those games the defense did. You actually think that Hill would have done better than Smith in the game against the Titans? did you not see what the offense looked like with Hill as the QB? At least Smith can put points on the board. He just needs an OLine and WR that don't tip the ball 10 feet in the air(has happend 4 times in 2 1/2 games) I guess that is what happens when you are used to catching passes that come down like a punt and then get a QB who can actually put some zip on the ball.

Hill had the same line as Alex did -- and produced three wins

Hill didn't have the receiving threats that Alex had yesterday -- yet still managed to put three wins on the board.

The defense didn't lose yesterday's game. Alex Smith lost yesterday's game with FIVE -- count them -- FIVE TURNOVERS. Name one game -- any game -- from any year -- where Shaun Hill put the ball on the ground FIVE TIMES.

Yes -- I think Hill would have won yesterday's game. He showed comeback ability in the Vikings game when he hit Vernon for a late TD. He showed the same ability during multiple games last season. I think Hill probably would have beat the Colts as well.

Again -- I really don't understand this debate. You have NO WINS to point too with Alex under center. You have MULTIPLE LOSSES. This league isn't about who has the stronger arm or who throws the nicer looking pass.

This league is about wins and losses. How can you not support the QB who has given us three wins? How can you possibly make the argument for a QB who has consistently given us loss after loss after loss after loss?

I just don't get it.

Originally posted by 49erWill:
cheat

We're not the Patriots

Originally posted by 49erWill:
cheat

Originally posted by RonMexico:
Score more points than they do.

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Hill didn't win those games the defense did. You actually think that Hill would have done better than Smith in the game against the Titans? did you not see what the offense looked like with Hill as the QB? At least Smith can put points on the board. He just needs an OLine and WR that don't tip the ball 10 feet in the air(has happend 4 times in 2 1/2 games) I guess that is what happens when you are used to catching passes that come down like a punt and then get a QB who can actually put some zip on the ball.

Hill had the same line as Alex did -- and produced three wins

Hill didn't have the receiving threats that Alex had yesterday -- yet still managed to put three wins on the board.

The defense didn't lose yesterday's game. Alex Smith lost yesterday's game with FIVE -- count them -- FIVE TURNOVERS. Name one game -- any game -- from any year -- where Shaun Hill put the ball on the ground FIVE TIMES.

Yes -- I think Hill would have won yesterday's game. He showed comeback ability in the Vikings game when he hit Vernon for a late TD. He showed the same ability during multiple games last season. I think Hill probably would have beat the Colts as well.

Again -- I really don't understand this debate. You have NO WINS to point too with Alex under center. You have MULTIPLE LOSSES. This league isn't about who has the stronger arm or who throws the nicer looking pass.

This league is about wins and losses. How can you not support the QB who has given us three wins? How can you possibly make the argument for a QB who has consistently given us loss after loss after loss after loss?

I just don't get it.

You like to leave out facts. Yes, Jesus Hill won 3 games, but he also lost 3. That leaves us on pace for...you guessed it, an 8-8 season (which is not winning). That makes 7 straight non-winning seasons. What do we get for that? A ring? Do we get a ring for going 8-8? Do we get free jerseys? What? Oh, that's right. We get nothing for that. Smith has only started 2 games. He has multiple losses. One by 4 points and one by 7 points. On the other hand, Hill has multiple losses as well, one of them being by 35 points, the other one was on pace to be by 42 points, until Smith came in and rescued him.

I don't understand the debate either. Smith should be starting, and he is. Even our head coach agrees.

[ Edited by B650 on Nov 9, 2009 at 15:46:44 ]

pray

DON'T KICK TO HESTER

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Would you rather start an old, talentless QB who gives you ZERO CHANCE at winning a Super Bowl, or a young QB with the talent to do so, who just lacks experience? It's simple. Hill is not the QB of the future. He won't win us a playoff game. He won't even get us to the playoffs. So, you might as well see what the backups have to offer, and so far, Smith has outplayed Hill. Even if we lose, I'd rather see the offense move the ball. It's less frustrating knowing that we can score. It's more frustrating seeing the defense going out there every single game playing its heart out, only to lose because Shaun Hill can't even pick up a single 1st-down.

The bottom line is that if the OL doesn't improve, it really doesn't matter who starts at QB. Just give it a rest. Seriously. Right now, we have the right guy out there. Smith has more talent than Hill, and guys with more talent should start. Yes, he throws more INTs, but he also throws more TDs. No point of having Crabtree, Hill, Morgan, and Davis if you have Hill throwing ducks to them. They won't be on the team much longer if that happens.

Old? Hill? Since when?

Talentless? You call three wins "talentless?" Really? What do you call ZERO wins? Promising?

Again -- I don't understand. There's no "promise" with Alex Smith. There is nothing but loss after loss after loss after loss.

Don't pin it on the line. Shaun had the same line. He engineered three wins with that line. How come Shaun Hill can engineer three wins with that line but your "promising " QB can't engineer one win against a Pop Warner team?

Don't pin it on the defense. The D gave up a late score against Minnesota. Hill not only drove us down the field -- he threw what should have been the winning TD pass to Vernon. He showed the comeback promise that Alex has never had.

Your numbers don't add up. Zero wins is not "promise." It's massive, giant, suckitude.

Three wins is promise. We'd get a few more with Shaun back in at QB.

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

This...at least we know Hill won't throw 3 picks in a game

yea unless you like losing 45-10 or down 21-0 at halftime....

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Hill didn't win those games the defense did. You actually think that Hill would have done better than Smith in the game against the Titans? did you not see what the offense looked like with Hill as the QB? At least Smith can put points on the board. He just needs an OLine and WR that don't tip the ball 10 feet in the air(has happend 4 times in 2 1/2 games) I guess that is what happens when you are used to catching passes that come down like a punt and then get a QB who can actually put some zip on the ball.

Hill had the same line as Alex did -- and produced three wins

Hill didn't have the receiving threats that Alex had yesterday -- yet still managed to put three wins on the board.

The defense didn't lose yesterday's game. Alex Smith lost yesterday's game with FIVE -- count them -- FIVE TURNOVERS. Name one game -- any game -- from any year -- where Shaun Hill put the ball on the ground FIVE TIMES.

Yes -- I think Hill would have won yesterday's game. He showed comeback ability in the Vikings game when he hit Vernon for a late TD. He showed the same ability during multiple games last season. I think Hill probably would have beat the Colts as well.

Again -- I really don't understand this debate. You have NO WINS to point too with Alex under center. You have MULTIPLE LOSSES. This league isn't about who has the stronger arm or who throws the nicer looking pass.

This league is about wins and losses. How can you not support the QB who has given us three wins? How can you possibly make the argument for a QB who has consistently given us loss after loss after loss after loss?

I just don't get it.

You like to leave out facts. Yes, Jesus Hill won 3 games, but he also lost 3. That leaves us on pace for...you guessed it, an 8-8 season (which is not winning). That makes 7 straight non-winning seasons. What do we get for that? A ring? Do we get a ring for going 8-8? Do we get free jerseys? What? Oh, that's right. We get nothing for that. Smith has only started 2 games. He has multiple losses. One by 4 points and one by 7 points. On the other hand, Hill has multiple losses as well, one of them being by 35 points, the other one was on pace to be by 42 points, until Smith came in and rescued him.

I don't understand the debate either. Smith should be starting, and he is. Even our head coach agrees.

OK -- so let me get this math straight:

3-13 is a GREAT FINISH because Alex is under center -- and our "saviour" has blessed us with a promising ten game losing streak that promises to transfer into a 16 game losing streak next season.

Yet -- the guy who gave us three wins -- well that transfers into 8-8. I don't know how you can predict that many losses -- especially since he's the guy who gave us our only three wins -- but what they hey.

I'd still go for a competitive 8-8 any day of the week over 3-13. And 3-13 is what we're looking at with Alex under center.

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Would you rather start an old, talentless QB who gives you ZERO CHANCE at winning a Super Bowl, or a young QB with the talent to do so, who just lacks experience? It's simple. Hill is not the QB of the future. He won't win us a playoff game. He won't even get us to the playoffs. So, you might as well see what the backups have to offer, and so far, Smith has outplayed Hill. Even if we lose, I'd rather see the offense move the ball. It's less frustrating knowing that we can score. It's more frustrating seeing the defense going out there every single game playing its heart out, only to lose because Shaun Hill can't even pick up a single 1st-down.

The bottom line is that if the OL doesn't improve, it really doesn't matter who starts at QB. Just give it a rest. Seriously. Right now, we have the right guy out there. Smith has more talent than Hill, and guys with more talent should start. Yes, he throws more INTs, but he also throws more TDs. No point of having Crabtree, Hill, Morgan, and Davis if you have Hill throwing ducks to them. They won't be on the team much longer if that happens.

Old? Hill? Since when?

Talentless? You call three wins "talentless?" Really? What do you call ZERO wins? Promising?

Again -- I don't understand. There's no "promise" with Alex Smith. There is nothing but loss after loss after loss after loss.

Don't pin it on the line. Shaun had the same line. He engineered three wins with that line. How come Shaun Hill can engineer three wins with that line but your "promising " QB can't engineer one win against a Pop Warner team?

Don't pin it on the defense. The D gave up a late score against Minnesota. Hill not only drove us down the field -- he threw what should have been the winning TD pass to Vernon. He showed the comeback promise that Alex has never had.

Your numbers don't add up. Zero wins is not "promise." It's massive, giant, suckitude.

Three wins is promise. We'd get a few more with Shaun back in at QB.

Really? What is there promise for? An 8-8 season? A 1st-round playoff exit? The guy had to be bailed out against the Rams, of all teams. He scored no points against the Rams in the entire 1st half of the game. The defense and special teams bailed him out. He then followed that up with his brilliant performance against the Falcons. Well, at least after that, he had a bye week to right the ship, especially since he was facing the Texans horrible secondary. He came out and looked absolutely disgusting yet again, losing the game by halftime. Smith came in and tried to rescue Jesus Hill, but it was too late.

Smith threw for 286 yards and 2 TDs against the Titans. That's promising compared to the hideous numbers Hill has put up this season. All Smith has to do is cut down on turnovers, and we have ourselves our QB of the future. All Hill has to do is magically improve his arm strength..oh wait..that can't happen.

End of debate.

Can we focus on the actual game now?

Originally posted by WestCoast:

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

This...at least we know Hill won't throw 3 picks in a game

yea unless you like losing 45-10 or down 21-0 at halftime....

Hill can't throw INT's because he can't throw past 5 yards

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Hill didn't win those games the defense did. You actually think that Hill would have done better than Smith in the game against the Titans? did you not see what the offense looked like with Hill as the QB? At least Smith can put points on the board. He just needs an OLine and WR that don't tip the ball 10 feet in the air(has happend 4 times in 2 1/2 games) I guess that is what happens when you are used to catching passes that come down like a punt and then get a QB who can actually put some zip on the ball.

Hill had the same line as Alex did -- and produced three wins

Hill didn't have the receiving threats that Alex had yesterday -- yet still managed to put three wins on the board.

The defense didn't lose yesterday's game. Alex Smith lost yesterday's game with FIVE -- count them -- FIVE TURNOVERS. Name one game -- any game -- from any year -- where Shaun Hill put the ball on the ground FIVE TIMES.

Yes -- I think Hill would have won yesterday's game. He showed comeback ability in the Vikings game when he hit Vernon for a late TD. He showed the same ability during multiple games last season. I think Hill probably would have beat the Colts as well.

Again -- I really don't understand this debate. You have NO WINS to point too with Alex under center. You have MULTIPLE LOSSES. This league isn't about who has the stronger arm or who throws the nicer looking pass.

This league is about wins and losses. How can you not support the QB who has given us three wins? How can you possibly make the argument for a QB who has consistently given us loss after loss after loss after loss?

I just don't get it.

You like to leave out facts. Yes, Jesus Hill won 3 games, but he also lost 3. That leaves us on pace for...you guessed it, an 8-8 season (which is not winning). That makes 7 straight non-winning seasons. What do we get for that? A ring? Do we get a ring for going 8-8? Do we get free jerseys? What? Oh, that's right. We get nothing for that. Smith has only started 2 games. He has multiple losses. One by 4 points and one by 7 points. On the other hand, Hill has multiple losses as well, one of them being by 35 points, the other one was on pace to be by 42 points, until Smith came in and rescued him.

I don't understand the debate either. Smith should be starting, and he is. Even our head coach agrees.

OK -- so let me get this math straight:

3-13 is a GREAT FINISH because Alex is under center -- and our "saviour" has blessed us with a promising ten game losing streak that promises to transfer into a 16 game losing streak next season.

Yet -- the guy who gave us three wins -- well that transfers into 8-8. I don't know how you can predict that many losses -- especially since he's the guy who gave us our only three wins -- but what they hey.

I'd still go for a competitive 8-8 any day of the week over 3-13. And 3-13 is what we're looking at with Alex under center.

Really? You think Smith is going to lead this team to a 3-13 season? We play the same teams Hill played soon. That means we have to fact the Rams, Seahawks, and Cardinals. That's at least 2 wins right there. We also play Jacksonville and Detroit at home. That looks to be 5 wins. So who's right: you or me? Only time will tell.

Again, the bottom line is that it doesn't matter who's at QB because if it's Hill, the OL will prevent him from throwing down the field, and if it's Smith, the OL will make Smith hurry his throws and cause INTs.

So what's better: 100 yards of total offense and losing because you couldn't gain yardage, or 300 yards of total offense and losing because of turnovers? Is there a difference? The difference is, with the 2nd option, there is hope that turnovers could be cut down. With the 1st option, there's no hope. Hill is almost 30 years old, and he's hit his peak already.

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by B650:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
Put Shaun Hill back into the starting lineup.

Name the QB who has actually won a game for us this season. Hint: His first name starts with an "S" and ends with an "N."

Name the QB who has the most losses this season. Hint: His first name starts with "S" and ends with "N." Still don't know? He went fishing on his bye week while the new starting QB was working with Crabtree.

Once again, name the ONLY QB on the 49er roster who has won a game THIS SEASON. Same hints apply.

Who gives a rip about fishing during the bye week? What does that have to do with WINS? Why do you insist on starting a QB who CANNOT WIN A GAME IF HIS LIFE DEPENDED ON IT?

I just don't understand your line of thinking on this matter. Please, please enlighten me. You would rather start a QB who gives us ZERO CHANCE at victory over another who has won three games this season? I just don't understand this debate.

Would you rather start an old, talentless QB who gives you ZERO CHANCE at winning a Super Bowl, or a young QB with the talent to do so, who just lacks experience? It's simple. Hill is not the QB of the future. He won't win us a playoff game. He won't even get us to the playoffs. So, you might as well see what the backups have to offer, and so far, Smith has outplayed Hill. Even if we lose, I'd rather see the offense move the ball. It's less frustrating knowing that we can score. It's more frustrating seeing the defense going out there every single game playing its heart out, only to lose because Shaun Hill can't even pick up a single 1st-down.

The bottom line is that if the OL doesn't improve, it really doesn't matter who starts at QB. Just give it a rest. Seriously. Right now, we have the right guy out there. Smith has more talent than Hill, and guys with more talent should start. Yes, he throws more INTs, but he also throws more TDs. No point of having Crabtree, Hill, Morgan, and Davis if you have Hill throwing ducks to them. They won't be on the team much longer if that happens.

Old? Hill? Since when?

Talentless? You call three wins "talentless?" Really? What do you call ZERO wins? Promising?

Again -- I don't understand. There's no "promise" with Alex Smith. There is nothing but loss after loss after loss after loss.

Don't pin it on the line. Shaun had the same line. He engineered three wins with that line. How come Shaun Hill can engineer three wins with that line but your "promising " QB can't engineer one win against a Pop Warner team?

Don't pin it on the defense. The D gave up a late score against Minnesota. Hill not only drove us down the field -- he threw what should have been the winning TD pass to Vernon. He showed the comeback promise that Alex has never had.

Your numbers don't add up. Zero wins is not "promise." It's massive, giant, suckitude.

Three wins is promise. We'd get a few more with Shaun back in at QB.

Really? What is there promise for? An 8-8 season? A 1st-round playoff exit? The guy had to be bailed out against the Rams, of all teams. He scored no points against the Rams in the entire 1st half of the game. The defense and special teams bailed him out. He then followed that up with his brilliant performance against the Falcons. Well, at least after that, he had a bye week to right the ship, especially since he was facing the Texans horrible secondary. He came out and looked absolutely disgusting yet again, losing the game by halftime. Smith came in and tried to rescue Jesus Hill, but it was too late.

Smith threw for 286 yards and 2 TDs against the Titans. That's promising compared to the hideous numbers Hill has put up this season. All Smith has to do is cut down on turnovers, and we have ourselves our QB of the future. All Hill has to do is magically improve his arm strength..oh wait..that can't happen.

End of debate.

Can we focus on the actual game now?

I don't care about how many yards or TD's Alex threw for. OK? Let's get that straight right now. I only care about two stats: WINS and LOSSES. That's the only thing that matters.

Alex cannot win football games. Period. He cannot beat a one-win team. He cannot beat a one win team AT HOME.

Jesus. I sound like Dr. Suess.

Shaun Hill has THREE WINS. He'd probably have MORE THAN THREE had he been allowed to keep going. Instead, he got yanked for "Mr. Promise."

Again, I cannot understand, for the life of me, this debate. Your man has NO VICTORIES. NONE. ZILCH. NADA. ZIP.

You have a QB riding the pine who delivered you three wins.

And you choose who?