There are 95 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Consensus: 2/3 of Smith's Picks were not his Fault

Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
Originally posted by 9erfan4life:

I was at that game.

Same!

Last time I saw you...
Originally posted by Esco:
Originally posted by SybErkRimInAL:
Originally posted by 9erfan4life:

I was at that game.

Same!

Last time I saw you...

Originally posted by NJNiner:
Maby if Alex was to put a little more air under his passes, they are less likely to be tipped.

How about if WR's just catch the ball instead of tipping it up in the air.
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Quote:
Go back in the thread. You'll see that the point of bringing up Rodgers was to show that he's successful despite his line. That's where YOU stepped in with your "double standard" s**t.

Ok my bad I must have misunderstood. With all the bullsht comparisons that go on its easy to misunderstand.

Quote:
I was merely pointing out that all good QBs don't have great offensive lines in response to hondakiller. I still don't understand what you were trying to say. You're implying that Rodgers has an "excuse" for his play.

*Yes, as in an excuse for last Sunday. Not his career or year. Had Alex been in Rodgers situation, I'm sure he could find ways to compensate for bad o-line play the way Rodgers has. I wanted to draft Rodgers but we didnt. We drafted Alex. Luckily Meyer told us how to develop Alex. Of course this team chose to ignore that.

Quote:
I think that only weakens your argument for Smith because despite how bad Rodgers' line has been, he's still posting a 103 QB rating.

Fair enough. Again though, if you cant see that they were developed differently thus having an effect on their success...I really dont know what to tell you.

Quote:
Of course we can't compare Smith and Rodgers though, since that's blasphemy. I mean, hell, they were only drafted in the same year and thought of as top prospects coming into the NFL.


*Pretty much where the similarities end. If you can say with a straight face that Rodgers succeeds in SF after going through everything Smith has...I dont know what to tell you. I think even Aaron Rodgers would agree with me. Im sure he counts his blessings every day.

Quote:
In any case, I find it laughable that you think Smith had a bad offensive line in 2006.

*It wasnt that bad. Thats when he showed the most improvement. But compared to other elite O-lines...its not that great. In GENERAL, his o-line has been below average. Thats not an excuse, thats a fact. I agree Alex had deficiencies though. Where did I say he didnt?

Quote:
That offensive line was good at both pass blocking and run blocking. I also find it ridiculous that you continue to blame all of Smith's deficiencies on people around him.

*Run blocking was good yes. Pass blocking was OKAY. And I never blame ALL of Smiths deficiencies on people around him. Ive been one of the more level headed posters on here and I think I'm pretty fair in my criticisms and praise. Unlike some, I didnt go from Smith to Hill to JTO then back to Hill, then back to Smith, then now to Davis, etc etc. Ive pretty much maintained, Smith should be the guy, and if he proves to be the long term answer then it saves this team a LOT of head ache. And Smiths deficiencies are because of him and our mishandling. How do you not see that? Dont you like to quote Urban Meyer? I mean we make this 50 million dollar investment and the guy who coached Smith told us EXACTLY what TO and NOT TO do with Smith. We fvcked up. Bottom line. So Alex's deficiencies are only going to be even MORE pronounced.


Quote:
The 3rd thing I find insane is how you think that Rodgers' success is based on the fact that "at one point" he had a great line. LOL, how far are you going to reach? Isn't it clear that not all QBs are created equal when they get to the NFL?

*I never said I think Rodger's success was based on the fact that he had a great line once. Stop putting words in my mouth. How far are you going to reach? And how much are you going to ignore the circumstances surrounding both QBs when the got drafted by their teams in 05. Again, do you honestly believe that Rodgers would have had the same success if he was put in Smiths situation? I doubt it. You may disagree and thats fine. I just find that "insane."

Quote:
Why the hell is it so hard to come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, Alex Smith isn't that good? Stop looking at everything around him for once.

*I never said Alex was a great QB. Ive maintained that he had a bad game. In fact I think I was one of the few Alex supporters that said, it really doesnt matter who's fault the INTs were...the bottom line is that they happened. And "why the hell is it so hard to come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe," if we brought Smith along the same was as Rodgers, he might be finding the same degree of success as Rodgers?

Quote:
Like I said earlier, I like Smith as our starting QB right now and I think he's improved. But really, some of you homers need to take the blinders off.

*And some of you "realists" need to start looking at things more "realistically."

In a lump sum response, I don't think Rodgers would be as good as he is if he were drafted by us #1. However, I also don't think he'd be nearly as bad as Smith is (or has been).

Along those same lines, you can't honestly believe that Smith would be as good as Rodgers if drafted by GB.

There are differences between QBs that go further than their environment. That's the point I'm trying to make. If you believe that the difference between Rodgers and Smith is simply the way they were "handled" then I don't know what to tell you except that it's wrong.

Coaching and handling does make a difference, no question. But good players find a way to make it because they're inherently better suited to play than bad ones.
Originally posted by Leathaface:
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Quote:
Go back in the thread. You'll see that the point of bringing up Rodgers was to show that he's successful despite his line. That's where YOU stepped in with your "double standard" s**t.

Ok my bad I must have misunderstood. With all the bullsht comparisons that go on its easy to misunderstand.

Quote:
I was merely pointing out that all good QBs don't have great offensive lines in response to hondakiller. I still don't understand what you were trying to say. You're implying that Rodgers has an "excuse" for his play.

*Yes, as in an excuse for last Sunday. Not his career or year. Had Alex been in Rodgers situation, I'm sure he could find ways to compensate for bad o-line play the way Rodgers has. I wanted to draft Rodgers but we didnt. We drafted Alex. Luckily Meyer told us how to develop Alex. Of course this team chose to ignore that.

Quote:
I think that only weakens your argument for Smith because despite how bad Rodgers' line has been, he's still posting a 103 QB rating.

Fair enough. Again though, if you cant see that they were developed differently thus having an effect on their success...I really dont know what to tell you.

Quote:
Of course we can't compare Smith and Rodgers though, since that's blasphemy. I mean, hell, they were only drafted in the same year and thought of as top prospects coming into the NFL.


*Pretty much where the similarities end. If you can say with a straight face that Rodgers succeeds in SF after going through everything Smith has...I dont know what to tell you. I think even Aaron Rodgers would agree with me. Im sure he counts his blessings every day.

Quote:
In any case, I find it laughable that you think Smith had a bad offensive line in 2006.

*It wasnt that bad. Thats when he showed the most improvement. But compared to other elite O-lines...its not that great. In GENERAL, his o-line has been below average. Thats not an excuse, thats a fact. I agree Alex had deficiencies though. Where did I say he didnt?

Quote:
That offensive line was good at both pass blocking and run blocking. I also find it ridiculous that you continue to blame all of Smith's deficiencies on people around him.

*Run blocking was good yes. Pass blocking was OKAY. And I never blame ALL of Smiths deficiencies on people around him. Ive been one of the more level headed posters on here and I think I'm pretty fair in my criticisms and praise. Unlike some, I didnt go from Smith to Hill to JTO then back to Hill, then back to Smith, then now to Davis, etc etc. Ive pretty much maintained, Smith should be the guy, and if he proves to be the long term answer then it saves this team a LOT of head ache. And Smiths deficiencies are because of him and our mishandling. How do you not see that? Dont you like to quote Urban Meyer? I mean we make this 50 million dollar investment and the guy who coached Smith told us EXACTLY what TO and NOT TO do with Smith. We fvcked up. Bottom line. So Alex's deficiencies are only going to be even MORE pronounced.


Quote:
The 3rd thing I find insane is how you think that Rodgers' success is based on the fact that "at one point" he had a great line. LOL, how far are you going to reach? Isn't it clear that not all QBs are created equal when they get to the NFL?

*I never said I think Rodger's success was based on the fact that he had a great line once. Stop putting words in my mouth. How far are you going to reach? And how much are you going to ignore the circumstances surrounding both QBs when the got drafted by their teams in 05. Again, do you honestly believe that Rodgers would have had the same success if he was put in Smiths situation? I doubt it. You may disagree and thats fine. I just find that "insane."

Quote:
Why the hell is it so hard to come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe, Alex Smith isn't that good? Stop looking at everything around him for once.

*I never said Alex was a great QB. Ive maintained that he had a bad game. In fact I think I was one of the few Alex supporters that said, it really doesnt matter who's fault the INTs were...the bottom line is that they happened. And "why the hell is it so hard to come to the conclusion that maybe, just maybe," if we brought Smith along the same was as Rodgers, he might be finding the same degree of success as Rodgers?

Quote:
Like I said earlier, I like Smith as our starting QB right now and I think he's improved. But really, some of you homers need to take the blinders off.

*And some of you "realists" need to start looking at things more "realistically."

In a lump sum response, I don't think Rodgers would be as good as he is if he were drafted by us #1. However, I also don't think he'd be nearly as bad as Smith is (or has been).

Along those same lines, you can't honestly believe that Smith would be as good as Rodgers if drafted by GB.

There are differences between QBs that go further than their environment. That's the point I'm trying to make. If you believe that the difference between Rodgers and Smith is simply the way they were "handled" then I don't know what to tell you except that it's wrong.

Coaching and handling does make a difference, no question. But good players find a way to make it because they're inherently better suited to play than bad ones.

Ok I agree with that. I think where we differ is how we judge who is better or worse. I never thought Rodgers was that much more talented than Smith or vice versa. I do think Rodgers was more of a sure fire ready to go QB while Smith was a project. But talent wise I didn't see much difference.

I think we can both agree Smith pretty much had no business being a first round pick let alone a number one overall pick. He was a 2nd-4th round project QB with a ton of upside, who with proper development and continutity would become really good.

But whatever hindsight is 20-20. Let's hope his mader chod turns it around. :p
Originally posted by D_Niner:
LOL. This guy throws more picks that were not his fault than any other QB that I know of...

There's got to be something to this...

Absolutely..

Oh wait, it's not his fault even though the ball was high, late and slightly behid! That WR shoulda caught by gum..

Roll out the clowns..

If he repeats at the Stick this Thursday, he gets booed out of the stadium, wanna bet?

NINERS!!!

[ Edited by Bali-Niner on Nov 11, 2009 at 18:25:47 ]
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by NJNiner:
Maby if Alex was to put a little more air under his passes, they are less likely to be tipped.

How about if WR's just catch the ball instead of tipping it up in the air.

Good point.

I'm going to sit back and watch another thread go on and on between Smith haters and Smith supporters.
Personally, I would rather have 3 INT's per game with Smith, than 8+ "3 and outs" with Hill. At least the offense has been able to move the ball, score more points and give the defense a decent amount of rest.

All thing considered, Smith's INT's will go down, but Hill's performance seemed to be topped out.
Originally posted by NinerForLife:
Personally, I would rather have 3 INT's per game with Smith, than 8+ "3 and outs" with Hill. At least the offense has been able to move the ball, score more points and give the defense a decent amount of rest.

All thing considered, Smith's INT's will go down, but Hill's performance seemed to be topped out.

How can you say the INTs will go down?!? This is what he has been doing since he came in the league except for a few games.

I hope they do...

But the guy has a certain way of playing and not much has changed.

Also I would like to say that 3 an outs are better than the INTs and fumbles; at least the team has a chance to play good D and eventually get a score, and maybe hold on to a tight game and win.

Not so the other way..

NINERS!!!

[ Edited by Bali-Niner on Nov 11, 2009 at 18:31:03 ]
Maybe if crabtree showed up tp traning camp he would of caught that pass instead of tiping it up for the other team,
Originally posted by Bali-Niner:
Originally posted by NinerForLife:
Personally, I would rather have 3 INT's per game with Smith, than 8+ "3 and outs" with Hill. At least the offense has been able to move the ball, score more points and give the defense a decent amount of rest.

All thing considered, Smith's INT's will go down, but Hill's performance seemed to be topped out.

How can you say the INTs will go down?!? This is what he has been doing since he came in the league except for a few games.

I hope they do...

But the guy has a certain way of playing and not much has changed.

Also I would like to say that 3 an outs are better than the INTs and fumbles; at least the team has a chance to play good D and eventually get a score, and maybe hold on to a tight game and win.

Not so the other way..

NINERS!!!

I think the INT's will go down once the offense spends some time together. Timing, chemistry and familiarity will only come with time. Having the best personnel at reciever (Crabs and Hill) as well as Smith getting more into a rythym with the offense and Raye calling plays suited to our players.

As for the defense playing well and getting a score, that hasn't really happened since the Rams game.

As for holding onto a tight game and getting a win, everyone on this board was screaming and whining because that was the game plan to start the season. Posters were wanting people to be fired because that was the game plan with Hill as the QB.

3 weeks ago, everyone wantedto "open up the offense", and when both Raye and Sing that it wasn't that simple people called them idiots. Well now the offense is being opened up and the team is having "growing pains" and is making some mistakes.

Improvement will not happpen overnight and for some reason this pisses people off. I still say that things will improve, but it will take longer that 2 1/2 games t do it.
Originally posted by NinerForLife:
Originally posted by Bali-Niner:
Originally posted by NinerForLife:
Personally, I would rather have 3 INT's per game with Smith, than 8+ "3 and outs" with Hill. At least the offense has been able to move the ball, score more points and give the defense a decent amount of rest.

All thing considered, Smith's INT's will go down, but Hill's performance seemed to be topped out.

How can you say the INTs will go down?!? This is what he has been doing since he came in the league except for a few games.

I hope they do...

But the guy has a certain way of playing and not much has changed.

Also I would like to say that 3 an outs are better than the INTs and fumbles; at least the team has a chance to play good D and eventually get a score, and maybe hold on to a tight game and win.

Not so the other way..

NINERS!!!

I think the INT's will go down once the offense spends some time together. Timing, chemistry and familiarity will only come with time. Having the best personnel at reciever (Crabs and Hill) as well as Smith getting more into a rythym with the offense and Raye calling plays suited to our players.

As for the defense playing well and getting a score, that hasn't really happened since the Rams game.

As for holding onto a tight game and getting a win, everyone on this board was screaming and whining because that was the game plan to start the season. Posters were wanting people to be fired because that was the game plan with Hill as the QB.

3 weeks ago, everyone wantedto "open up the offense", and when both Raye and Sing that it wasn't that simple people called them idiots. Well now the offense is being opened up and the team is having "growing pains" and is making some mistakes.

Improvement will not happpen overnight and for some reason this pisses people off. I still say that things will improve, but it will take longer that 2 1/2 games t do it.

A few more games will answer all the questions about Smith, Raye and Singletary.
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Ok I agree with that. I think where we differ is how we judge who is better or worse. I never thought Rodgers was that much more talented than Smith or vice versa. I do think Rodgers was more of a sure fire ready to go QB while Smith was a project. But talent wise I didn't see much difference.

I think we can both agree Smith pretty much had no business being a first round pick let alone a number one overall pick. He was a 2nd-4th round project QB with a ton of upside, who with proper development and continutity would become really good.

But whatever hindsight is 20-20. Let's hope his mader chod turns it around. :p

Yea and to be perfectly honest, I actually do think Smith has looked a lot better. His timing is still not completely there but I think by the end of the season it will be. I mean it is true that he's played 2.5 games. Good that we play tomorrow...we get to see him bounce back without much time to think about it.

Throwing for 280 is something that you never expected out of him in 06 and 07. Despite the picks in the Tenn game, he made some great plays as well (Jason Hill's first TD and VD for 40 to name a couple).

I almost feel like he's a rookie who has sat a few years and is learning on the fly right now...but that's not necessarily a bad thing since I feel like our season isn't going to end in an NFC West crown anyway.

I guess I could say I look at it like Kevin Lynch does in his radio interview...something is brewing here offensively, but it's gonna have to wait til next season to push us into the playoffs. There's a foundation to build on with Crabtree, VD, Gore, Hill, Morgan, and hopefully Smith. That's a nice core. Now if we can add a few (like 3 or 4) linemen this offseason, I know we'll make noise next year.

Oh and LOL @ the bolded, haha.

[ Edited by Leathaface on Nov 11, 2009 at 19:26:47 ]
Originally posted by Leathaface:
Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Ok I agree with that. I think where we differ is how we judge who is better or worse. I never thought Rodgers was that much more talented than Smith or vice versa. I do think Rodgers was more of a sure fire ready to go QB while Smith was a project. But talent wise I didn't see much difference.

I think we can both agree Smith pretty much had no business being a first round pick let alone a number one overall pick. He was a 2nd-4th round project QB with a ton of upside, who with proper development and continutity would become really good.

But whatever hindsight is 20-20. Let's hope his mader chod turns it around. :p

Yea and to be perfectly honest, I actually do think Smith has looked a lot better. His timing is still not completely there but I think by the end of the season it will be. I mean it is true that he's played 2.5 games. Good that we play tomorrow...we get to see him bounce back without much time to think about it.

Throwing for 280 is something that you never expected out of him in 06 and 07. Despite the picks in the Tenn game, he made some great plays as well (Jason Hill's first TD and VD for 40 to name a couple).

I almost feel like he's a rookie who has sat a few years and is learning on the fly right now...but that's not necessarily a bad thing since I feel like our season isn't going to end in an NFC West crown anyway.

I guess I could say I look at it like Kevin Lynch does in his radio interview...something is brewing here offensively, but it's gonna have to wait til next season to push us into the playoffs. There's a foundation to build on with Crabtree, VD, Gore, Hill, Morgan, and hopefully Smith. That's a nice core. Now if we can add a few (like 3 or 4) linemen this offseason, I know we'll make noise next year.

Oh and LOL @ the bolded, haha.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on what it will specifically take from Smith for you to be on board for bringing him back next year.

-9fA
Originally posted by NinerForLife:
I think the INT's will go down once the offense spends some time together. Timing, chemistry and familiarity will only come with time. Having the best personnel at reciever (Crabs and Hill) as well as Smith getting more into a rythym with the offense and Raye calling plays suited to our players.

As for the defense playing well and getting a score, that hasn't really happened since the Rams game.

As for holding onto a tight game and getting a win, everyone on this board was screaming and whining because that was the game plan to start the season. Posters were wanting people to be fired because that was the game plan with Hill as the QB.

3 weeks ago, everyone wantedto "open up the offense", and when both Raye and Sing (stated) that it wasn't that simple people called them idiots. Well now the offense is being opened up and the team is having "growing pains" and is making some mistakes.

Improvement will not happpen overnight and for some reason this pisses people off. I still say that things will improve, but it will take longer that 2 1/2 games t do it.

Not everyone NFL, but I feel ya. There is no middle ground here so far as 9er fans are concerned. Either you are good now or you should be cut, waived, fired or whatever.

It's sad that it's come to this.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by NJNiner:
Maby if Alex was to put a little more air under his passes, they are less likely to be tipped.

How about if WR's just catch the ball instead of tipping it up in the air.



Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by D_Niner:
LOL. This guy throws more picks that were not his fault than any other QB that I know of...

There's got to be something to this...

if this continues....forget a Brady rule...I think there should be a Alex rule....if the ball gets deflected, it is a penalty if the opposing defense catches the ball...if it does happen.....automatic 1st down, with the culprit suspended for the rest of the game.......just so "Teammates, Coaches, Management, the Bears Coaching staff, and analysts." don't have to go through so much time to defend the guy.

Probably seems like I'm piling on....but I understand if Alex was still a rookie....or if this was just a new thing....but its not, and when all these people come to his defense...its like they are all worried about his confidence....as if he is still a rookie.....basically like "its ok Alex its not your fault...continue what you're doing......it has been working mighty fine." no.....I REALLY HOPE Sing or Raye are REALLY getting through to Alex behind the scenes that this is unacceptable.....especially in this league where these defenders live off turnovers.....they are athletic as fk and thrive off mistimed passes....or dropped passes.

That's not why they are defending him though. They know and understand that in San Francisco as the Starting QB that Alex's position as QB1 is tenuous at best with the fans.

It's not that they are babying him, so much as it is they are pointing this out in the hopes that the FANS' will be patient with him. It's not like he's just another in a long line of average QBs' with no level of expectation to meet with us. He is following legends. And that is a tough act to follow in any business let alone the NFL.

~Ceadder

[ Edited by Ceadderman on Nov 11, 2009 at 19:58:13 ]