Originally posted by Afrikan:Originally posted by B650:Originally posted by D_Niner:Originally posted by B650:Originally posted by D_Niner:Originally posted by B650:Originally posted by AiNoKea:
We all know what's best for our beloved team, its just our opinions differ. But you say your not a Smith supporter, Hill basher....but that's funny, I didn't EVER see you support or back up Hill when he was starting??
Funny how short of a leash Hill gets as opposed to Alex Smith. Two games and we pull Hill, how much have we lost already with Smith in there??
It's not about wins and losses, it's about how each QB has played. Do you think just because Hill won 1 more game than Smith did, he should remain QB for the remainder of the season? We should be happy that Hill beat the Rams and Seahawks? He played basically 5.5 bad games. The defense let him off the hook in each of the games. Yes, the defense bailed out Smith against Chicago, but Gore was able to ice the game. Notice how we ran the ball out of shotgun though? Do you see a reason for that? The Bears had to respect Smith's arm, so we could actually use shotgun and run the ball out of it, and we were pretty successful with that. With Hill back there, I doubt we'd get that creative. We'd just continue to run the ball up the gut just like we did against Arizona and Minnesota.
By the way, I was supporting Hill last season after he took over for O'Sullivan. I thought he was pretty good last year. He was getting rid of the ball quickly and throwing accurately. Unfortunately, all QBs appear that way with Martz, and now that he's gone, we all see Hill's true colors.
What are you talking about? It's all about wins and losses... No team makes the playoffs because there QB had more 300 yard games or less turnovers throughout the season...
To answer your question, I don't think anyone wants Hill to be our QB because he's won 2 more games than Smith this year. I think it's because he hasn't given the game away with turnovers and stupid actions (penalties/decisions/etc...)
We all know if our team wins the turnover battle we stand a better chance of winning the game, right? Including fumbles lost, Alex averages 2 turnovers a start right now. Shaun averages 1/2 of a turnover per start this year.
For Alex, all of his turnovers have led to a total of 27 points. For Hill, his have led to a total of 13 points. Averaging across the # of starts, Smith needs to score 9 additional points per start to make up for his turnovers where Shaun need just over 2.
Now averaging how many points we put up with each QB in there per start (not counting the Hou game because of obvious reasons) Smith averages 17 points a game and Hill averages 22...
The reason I put all this info out like this is to prove that Smith is hurting the team much more than he is helping. His turnovers are costing us more points per game and with him as the QB we are putting up less points per game. This is a formula for losing...
Look, Hill sucks. We know this; but, he's been better for the team than Smith has so far.
Not according to the 49ers coaches and about 95% of the fans. You're in the minority on this one. Just because Hill didn't throw INTs, doesn't mean he's better for the team. He lead the league in 3-and-outs. Remember that, or did you conveniently block this from your memory? Smith moves the ball. Our run game is improved. Our OL is improved. Our defense is better rested. That's why he's the starter and Hill is on the bench.
Jesus Christ, I can't believe anyone would still want Hill starting after the Rams, Falcons, and Texans games. Seriously, go back and watch those 3 games one after another. Now tell me, after you're done wasting about 9 hours of your life, if you want this to continue.
If that's what you think then that's fine... I don't care if you think I'm in the minority on this or not.
If you remember your history, the minority knew the worlds was round when most thought it was flat. Point is, just cause you think you're in the majority does not make you right.
As for you're argument, did you read the numbers I posted. We did better on O against tougher D's with Hill in than we have fared with Smith.
We have cameras and videotape now, so it's obvious the Earth is round, just like it's obvious Smith is better than Hill.
could've fooled me.
Yeah; but were minorities. So, our opinion doesn't count..