There are 136 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

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

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?
Originally posted by billbird2111:
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?

Smith has faced the Colts and a Titans team who was healthy against us and was 13 - 3 last year. Did you really expect us to beat the Colts?

Hill's wins came against Rams, Hawks, AZ.

Got murdered by Houston, ATL and still lost to MIN (remember all you care about is W or L's)

[ Edited by BirdmanJr on Nov 9, 2009 at 16:01:47 ]
  • B650
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,205
Originally posted by billbird2111:
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?

I choose the QB who gives us the potential to give us a 10-win season, one day. Unfortunately for you, Hill is not that guy. Yes, he might give us 8 wins this season if we let him keep going. We know he has 3 wins. He also lost his last 2 games. So, if Smith is on pace for a 3-13 season because he lost 2 straight games, what about Hill? You're only as good as your last game right? Well, Hill has lost his last 2 games, and they were some of the ugliest games I've ever witnessed as a 49ers fan. Good riddance. Now he can go practice his fishing. Hopefully a strong fish doesn't come along and send Hill into the water, drowning and killing him. After all, he does have the weakest arm in the NFL.
Originally posted by B650:
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.

Let's see now. First -- you "counted" the losses that you thought Hill would have down the stretch.

Now -- you've "counted" the wins that you think Alex will have down the stretch (provided "Mr. Promise" remains in the starting lineup).

Nice

But -- I'm going to do you one better. I'm going to count wins and losses that have already occurred.

Shaun Hill: THREE WINS
Alex Smith: ZERO WINS

It's just my lowly opinion, but I think the guy who gives us the best chance at winning games -- the guy who has already demonstrated that he can win games -- should probably be playing the rest of the way.
  • B650
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,205
Originally posted by billbird2111:
Originally posted by B650:
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.

Let's see now. First -- you "counted" the losses that you thought Hill would have down the stretch.

Now -- you've "counted" the wins that you think Alex will have down the stretch (provided "Mr. Promise" remains in the starting lineup).

Nice

But -- I'm going to do you one better. I'm going to count wins and losses that have already occurred.

Shaun Hill: THREE WINS
Alex Smith: ZERO WINS

It's just my lowly opinion, but I think the guy who gives us the best chance at winning games -- the guy who has already demonstrated that he can win games -- should probably be playing the rest of the way.

Brilliant logic. In that case, let's just keep Shaun Hill starting..forever. I mean, why draft a QB? Any QB we bring in is going to have no wins too. Jesus Hill, on the other hand, has won an NFL game. Yippeeeee!!!! We should just hand the 49ers the Lombardi because Hill has 3 wins out of 6 games. He wins 50% of his games. If your wife cheats on you 50% of the time, does that make you a winner?

I'm done with this ridiculous debate. Think whatever you want to think, but all I know is that Mike Singletary agrees with me.
Not turn the ball over 4 times.

Not give up big plays.

QB Pressure.
Originally posted by billbird2111:
Originally posted by B650:
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.

Let's see now. First -- you "counted" the losses that you thought Hill would have down the stretch.

Now -- you've "counted" the wins that you think Alex will have down the stretch (provided "Mr. Promise" remains in the starting lineup).

Nice

But -- I'm going to do you one better. I'm going to count wins and losses that have already occurred.

Shaun Hill: THREE WINS
Alex Smith: ZERO WINS

It's just my lowly opinion, but I think the guy who gives us the best chance at winning games -- the guy who has already demonstrated that he can win games -- should probably be playing the rest of the way.

I love the Hillusionists ideology. The team wins it is all because of Hill. The team loses it is on the team Sorry to burst your bubble but Hill did not win those games, the defense did.
  • Nes49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 5,345
Originally posted by TheG0RE49er:
Not turn the ball over 4 times.

Not give up big plays.

QB Pressure.

Pure & Simple......I like...let hope the 9ers can produce.
Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Originally posted by billbird2111:
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?

Smith has faced the Colts and a Titans team who was healthy against us and was 13 - 3 last year. Did you really expect us to beat the Colts?

Hill's wins came against Rams, Hawks, AZ.

Got murdered by Houston, ATL and still lost to MIN (remember all you care about is W or L's)

Perchance, are you referring to the 13-3 team that has won only ONE game this season?

The one-win team that is now a two-win team? Thanks to the QB who can't beat a one win team? At home no less?

Promise? What promise? Alex Smith has delivered seven straight losses. I can tell you that with a straight face because it's a fact. You can go ahead with the line that "he has the potential to lead us to a ten win season," sure. But that's just laughable. Because, in reality, he's delivered us seven straight losses. And soon, in another four days, that number will grow to eight. And, if he stays in the starting lineup, the number will climb to nine the following week and to ten in the week beyond that.

See, you can trust "Mr. Promise" to deliver losses. Because, that's what he does. It's the only thing he does. And you can count on that. Take it to the bank. Take out a home loan on the fact that Alex Smith will continue to lose games until Singletary or someone in the Niner front office screams "UNCLE" (as in Uncle Eddie I hope).
  • B650
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4,205
Originally posted by billbird2111:
Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Originally posted by billbird2111:
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?

Smith has faced the Colts and a Titans team who was healthy against us and was 13 - 3 last year. Did you really expect us to beat the Colts?

Hill's wins came against Rams, Hawks, AZ.

Got murdered by Houston, ATL and still lost to MIN (remember all you care about is W or L's)

Perchance, are you referring to the 13-3 team that has won only ONE game this season?

The one-win team that is now a two-win team? Thanks to the QB who can't beat a one win team? At home no less?

Promise? What promise? Alex Smith has delivered seven straight losses. I can tell you that with a straight face because it's a fact. You can go ahead with the line that "he has the potential to lead us to a ten win season," sure. But that's just laughable. Because, in reality, he's delivered us seven straight losses. And soon, in another four days, that number will grow to eight. And, if he stays in the starting lineup, the number will climb to nine the following week and to ten in the week beyond that.

See, you can trust "Mr. Promise" to deliver losses. Because, that's what he does. It's the only thing he does. And you can count on that. Take it to the bank. Take out a home loan on the fact that Alex Smith will continue to lose games until Singletary or someone in the Niner front office screams "UNCLE" (as in Uncle Eddie I hope).

Just make sure you're still here when your plan doesn't go as scheduled. I was right about Davis not being a bust, and we'll see about Smith.
  • Nes49
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 5,345
AGAIN....No Smith vs. Hill!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A lot of you should pay attention to Jay Cutler in the upcoming game. Perfect example of what a Good QB looks like leading a top to bottom pretty bad team. If he has a typical game, you will see he won't look horrendous, though he too has many excuses to look bad.
Originally posted by susweel:
Sing needs to wear a bigger cross around his neck. Because clearly god is not seeing the one he has, just look at all the bad bounces we are getting.

Originally posted by B650:
Originally posted by billbird2111:
Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Originally posted by billbird2111:
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?

Smith has faced the Colts and a Titans team who was healthy against us and was 13 - 3 last year. Did you really expect us to beat the Colts?

Hill's wins came against Rams, Hawks, AZ.

Got murdered by Houston, ATL and still lost to MIN (remember all you care about is W or L's)

Perchance, are you referring to the 13-3 team that has won only ONE game this season?

The one-win team that is now a two-win team? Thanks to the QB who can't beat a one win team? At home no less?

Promise? What promise? Alex Smith has delivered seven straight losses. I can tell you that with a straight face because it's a fact. You can go ahead with the line that "he has the potential to lead us to a ten win season," sure. But that's just laughable. Because, in reality, he's delivered us seven straight losses. And soon, in another four days, that number will grow to eight. And, if he stays in the starting lineup, the number will climb to nine the following week and to ten in the week beyond that.

See, you can trust "Mr. Promise" to deliver losses. Because, that's what he does. It's the only thing he does. And you can count on that. Take it to the bank. Take out a home loan on the fact that Alex Smith will continue to lose games until Singletary or someone in the Niner front office screams "UNCLE" (as in Uncle Eddie I hope).

Just make sure you're still here when your plan doesn't go as scheduled. I was right about Davis not being a bust, and we'll see about Smith.

Don't worry. I'll be here. I live, breath and die 49ers. Have for years. I waste way too much time, money, effort and attention on this team during football season. I probably always will until the day I take my final breath.

I've seen, firsthand, great 49er teams rise from the ash heap. I hope to see it again someday. I do not think Alex Smith will be the one to get us there. I don't think Shaun Hill is that QB either.

I just know that Hill is the better QB of the two solely based upon the won-loss record.

It's hard to argue for Smith with his atrocious record. It's akin bringing a rubber knife to a bazooka fight.
Originally posted by danimal:
A lot of you should pay attention to Jay Cutler in the upcoming game. Perfect example of what a Good QB looks like leading a top to bottom pretty bad team. If he has a typical game, you will see he won't look horrendous, though he too has many excuses to look bad.

The guy can throw a great ball. The guy cannot always make a great decision.