Sing's opinion on the QB position . . .

Does anyone else find this statement by Singletary perplexing or even scary? "To me, I still believe the quarterback position is really important. But I don't think it's what they make it out to be. 'The quarterback is the most important guy"...' I don't believe that. I really don't."
Seems like every coach, analyst or whoever, that has anything to do with the NFL, has stated, at one time or another, it all starts with the QB. Just curious how many of you believe the same or are you worried about Sing's vision and plan for this team into the future? I understand it takes more than just a QB to win, but, if you had to choose between a franchise QB and franchise (insert any other position) . . . I'll take the QB

I think it starts with the o-line. a good o-line can make a bad qb look great. no hate on tom brady but were would he be if he had a bad o-line his whole career

I think he is just saying that the qb doesn't have to do everything. If you have a good all around team your qb doesn't have to be a superstar.

Only perplexing on a slow off season news day. For the rest of us who are supportive 49ers fan, we understand what he's trying to say. And it's a non-issue.

Sing is a defensive-minded coach. I'm sure he knows and understands the QB position is important to the game of football, but he was the heart and soul of the Chicago Bears during his playing days, and not just the Defense, the entire team.

If you look at Trent Dilfer during his superbowl run with the Ravens, the defense and tough physical running game helped lead them to success. I'm not saying Dilfer didn't do anything, but Trent was definitely not the leader and most important player on that team... Ray Lewis and company were.

If we look at our current team, Patrick Willis is the leader of the Defense, a leader of the team, and the face of our franchise... not Alex Smith.

I'm sure Sing is rooting for Alex to do well, but you can't blame him for being bias towards other positions (linebackers).

Perfect examples for Mike Singletary's case:

Troy Aikman
John Elway
Phil Simms
Dan Marino
Mark Rypien
Brett Favre
Steve Young

These guys could never win a superbowl until the running game was the main focus and Marino never won it. Steve Young never won until our defense was better than our offense. They all had the capabilities to get the job done when needed but their superbowl wins weren't mainly because of them.

Originally posted by Joecool:
Perfect examples for Mike Singletary's case:

Troy Aikman
John Elway
Phil Simms
Dan Marino
Mark Rypien
Brett Favre
Steve Young

These guys could never win a superbowl until the running game was the main focus and Marino never won it. Steve Young never won until our defense was better than our offense. They all had the capabilities to get the job done when needed but their superbowl wins weren't mainly because of them.

So, if Alex Smith is the QB on those those superbowl winning teams, you think they still win the superbowl???

Originally posted by qnnhan7:
Only perplexing on a slow off season news day. For the rest of us who are supportive 49ers fan, we understand what he's trying to say. And it's a non-issue.

You might agree with Singletary's vision and philosophy, but it is far from a non-issue!

Originally posted by gold49er2183:
I think it starts with the o-line. a good o-line can make a bad qb look great. no hate on tom brady but were would he be if he had a bad o-line his whole career

This.

It's been proven season in and season out for us. The Oline has averaged 50 sacks allowed or more for the last 7 years.

You could have a cannon under center and it still would not get the ball off before someone knocked it over. Makes a case for bringing in a Mike Vick in his 1st few seasons but we know how THAT turned out don't we?

~Ceadder

Originally posted by tommyncal:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Perfect examples for Mike Singletary's case:

Troy Aikman
John Elway
Phil Simms
Dan Marino
Mark Rypien
Brett Favre
Steve Young

These guys could never win a superbowl until the running game was the main focus and Marino never won it. Steve Young never won until our defense was better than our offense. They all had the capabilities to get the job done when needed but their superbowl wins weren't mainly because of them.

So, if Alex Smith is the QB on those those superbowl winning teams, you think they still win the superbowl???

Dude, ANY GIVEN SUNDAY, Dilfer won a Super Bowl with Baltimore. W/O that Defense would they even have made the Playoffs?

Quit beating your horse Semantics. He's already dead. It's time to let him go.

Oh and our DEFENSE was not better than our Offense in '95. You better look at how many points our Offense put on the board. Our Defense DID get better and we needed it to get better but it was NOT better than our Offense.Prime example is look at the amount of points dropped on San Di-uhoh by one Steve Young and one Jerry Rice.

~Ceadder

[ Edited by Ceadderman on Apr 25, 2010 at 23:18:33 ]

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by gold49er2183:
I think it starts with the o-line. a good o-line can make a bad qb look great. no hate on tom brady but were would he be if he had a bad o-line his whole career

This.

It's been proven season in and season out for us. The Oline has averaged 50 sacks allowed or more for the last 7 years.

You could have a cannon under center and it still would not get the ball off before someone knocked it over. Makes a case for bringing in a Mike Vick in his 1st few seasons but we know how THAT turned out don't we?

~Ceadder

I agree with your point, but the statement by Sing was the QB was not the most important position. Not that you don't need a good OL and defense. Singletary does not believe the QB is the most important position, do you? If you had the choice to pick 1 franchise player, what position would it be?
In the last 22 years . . . winning Superbowl Qb's: Brees, Roethlisberger, E Manning, P Manning, Brady, B Johnson, Dilfer, Warner, Elway, Favre, Aikman, Young, Rypien, Simms, Montana. I'd say history makes a pretty good point. Only 3, IMO, are not franchise QB's.

[ Edited by tommyncal on Apr 25, 2010 at 23:36:07 ]

Originally posted by tommyncal:
Does anyone else find this statement by Singletary perplexing or even scary? "To me, I still believe the quarterback position is really important. But I don't think it's what they make it out to be. 'The quarterback is the most important guy"...' I don't believe that. I really don't."
Seems like every coach, analyst or whoever, that has anything to do with the NFL, has stated, at one time or another, it all starts with the QB. Just curious how many of you believe the same or are you worried about Sing's vision and plan for this team into the future? I understand it takes more than just a QB to win, but, if you had to choose between a franchise QB and franchise (insert any other position) . . . I'll take the QB

Great post. I was contemplating starting the topic on this quote myself. It deserves a lot more attention.

I find it VERY SCARY that he thinks this. It's a QB driven league and if Singletary can't see that (which he obviously can't judging by his comments) we're going to be destined for another 8-8 season.

You can't mask your QBs deficiencies in this league. If we try to run-run-pass, we're going to be just as screwed as we were last season when our offense was bogging down.

Remember how stubborn to change our coaches were? We needed to pass the ball. This was 100% crystal clear to me by the middle of the game @ Arizona (week 1). We were successful when we let Hill pass via a spread attack. Defenses are going to crowd the line of scrimmage and blitz like hell if we're as predictable as we were last season. The coaches only changed when it was absolutely necessary (second half @HOU, second half @GB for two examples).

We need to put Smith in a position to succeed...b/c we need our QB to produce. We have to use 3 WR sets or sets with 2 WR and Vernon split out. Alex doesn't necessarily have to be out of the gun, but we need to make the formations more spread whether we run or pass. There is a happy balance that can exist in which we also use a FB (see the Arizona). My issue is, I don't believe we're going to start out like that...Singletary is going to try to pound the rock and we're going to be stuck with -2, -1, 0, 1, 2 yard gains.

If we try to congest the middle and pound it away, WE WILL LOSE and I can guarantee you that. Singletary obviously hasn't changed that much. It's going to take a 2-4 start to before any offensive changes happen.

I honestly don't think this has that much to do with Alex Smith...it has more to do with the unimaginative 1980s offensive mindset our coach has.

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by tommyncal:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Perfect examples for Mike Singletary's case:

Troy Aikman
John Elway
Phil Simms
Dan Marino
Mark Rypien
Brett Favre
Steve Young

These guys could never win a superbowl until the running game was the main focus and Marino never won it. Steve Young never won until our defense was better than our offense. They all had the capabilities to get the job done when needed but their superbowl wins weren't mainly because of them.

So, if Alex Smith is the QB on those those superbowl winning teams, you think they still win the superbowl???

Dude, ANY GIVEN SUNDAY, Dilfer won a Super Bowl with Baltimore. W/O that Defense would they even have made the Playoffs?

Quit beating your horse Semantics. He's already dead. It's time to let him go.

Oh and our DEFENSE was not better than our Offense in '95. You better look at how many points our Offense put on the board. Our Defense DID get better and we needed it to get better but it was NOT better than our Offense.Prime example is look at the amount of points dropped on San Di-uhoh by one Steve Young and one Jerry Rice.

~Ceadder

Our defense was better than our offense that year. Just because our offense scored tons of points against OTHER defenses doesn't mean a thing. I don't think Steve Young would be very effective against our defense.

BTW, what did the Niners (I won't say Young) do when Deon left? The defense was the reason why we won that superbowl more than it was the QB.

And about the Alex Smith comment...if Dilfer can win one, anyone QB can.

Well that answers my question on why they chose to pick up David Carr and not draft one.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by tommyncal:

Originally posted by Joecool:
Perfect examples for Mike Singletary's case:

Troy Aikman
John Elway
Phil Simms
Dan Marino
Mark Rypien
Brett Favre
Steve Young

These guys could never win a superbowl until the running game was the main focus and Marino never won it. Steve Young never won until our defense was better than our offense. They all had the capabilities to get the job done when needed but their superbowl wins weren't mainly because of them.

So, if Alex Smith is the QB on those those superbowl winning teams, you think they still win the superbowl???

Dude, ANY GIVEN SUNDAY, Dilfer won a Super Bowl with Baltimore. W/O that Defense would they even have made the Playoffs?

Quit beating your horse Semantics. He's already dead. It's time to let him go.

Oh and our DEFENSE was not better than our Offense in '95. You better look at how many points our Offense put on the board. Our Defense DID get better and we needed it to get better but it was NOT better than our Offense.Prime example is look at the amount of points dropped on San Di-uhoh by one Steve Young and one Jerry Rice.

~Ceadder

Our defense was better than our offense that year. Just because our offense scored tons of points against OTHER defenses doesn't mean a thing. I don't think Steve Young would be very effective against our defense.

BTW, what did the Niners (I won't say Young) do when Deon left? The defense was the reason why we won that superbowl more than it was the QB.

And about the Alex Smith comment...if Dilfer can win one, anyone QB can.

You're crazy if you think the 94-95 team won b/c of the defense. Yes the defense was in need of a upgrade, and yes they were awesome. But just b/c the defense got better relative to the previous year doesn't mean it was the stronger unit.

That's just ridiculous, I'm sorry. The 94-95 team had one of the most complete offenses the 49ers have ever had.