Razzano remarks

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:
part of all the changes in OC, coaches, systems, etc that Alex played in was his continuing ineptness and lack of consistent results. if he had played very well in his first year and on like a 1st overall should, all the personnel and esp the system around him wouldn't have changed so much. People from within would have been promoted to the OC position to keep the momentum going with Alex's great results, instead of doing brand new OC searches outside of the team. Nolan would have never gotten fired either, most likely, if Smith hadn't kept laying eggs on the field.

we promoted from within and ended up with the hostler. as we all know, that was not the same as norv turners offense. nobody knows what hostler was thinking, not even hostler. nolan sent himself packing by dividing the team and trying to shift all the blame to alex. some of it was his fault but he basically blamed alex for being injured and his doctors cleared him to come back and the re-injury made him miss a good season and a half combined. we wouldve known if alex was gonna amount to anything had nolan not put him in when he wasnt healthy and downplayed his injury. instead alex goes on IR for a year after his still injured comeback and his still recovering shoulder is re inured in camp. it was kind of a blessing tho because now the team looks settled, there is some continuity and alex took a pay cut. that pay cut to me is confidence in his own skills that he can earn big money again. nolan leaving the building was the single best thing that couldve happened for this team, especially the young offensive talent. nolan blamed alex, nolan didnt know how to handle VD, nolan wouldnt play younger guys in favor of people like D-Drop, Morton, Conway or whoever else he brought in to save our receiving corps. good riddance to that clown.

Do you think if we had, say, Drew Brees as QB that he would have struggled under Hostler as well? We may be confusing cause and effect here. I think Smith's historical capabilities, learning curve expediency, and on the field performance could make any OC look mediocre.

steve young and joe montana wouldve looked bad in that offense. hostler wasnt worthy of a waterboy job and he was made the OC. he was the QB coach, how come as soon as he left and smith got another healthy chance to play he impressed? why did jay cutlers numbers drop when he went to chicago? why did steve youngs go up when he came to the 49ers? why did jeff garcia's numbers drop like a brick when he went to cleveland and detroit and then go up again when he went to philly and tampa? the system has a lot to do with the results, as does the supporting talent.

Really? Because Shaun Hill looked GOOD under Hostler. Gee, I wonder why.

I'll wait for the excuse.

shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

Yep, exactly what I though you'd come up with.

The fact of the matter is Shaun Hill was more comfortable and calm than Smith, which allowed him to MAKE PLAYS. I don't give a rats ass if he playing just one quarter all year, the fact is he didn't look like sh*t, as you claim Montana and Young would have. And you say teams figured him out.. What the hell was there to figure out!? He's an average QB that happened to be better than our number 1 draft pick at that time. He wasn't some dynamic QB that threw teams off with his abilities and forced them to "figure him out." Please. He did what Smith couldn't do. Period.

My point is that Hostler's sh*tty system isn't to blame for the things Smith was incapable of (escaping pressure, scanning the field on the run, finding open targets and accurately getting them the football instead of passing it to the fans, for example - all of which Shaun Hill proved capable of doing in just 2 games).

By "figure him out", I believe he is referencing Hill's stellar year last year. Teams figured out he isn't really a threat, closed of the short routes and choked Hill out of a job. Smith came in and made plays. Really, a reverse performance compared to the season you're tlaking about. Hill sucked, Smith came in and made plays. He made the plays Hill couldn't make.

I agree he started to make plays Hill couldn't make, but the system had to be changed for that to happen. Or did you forget the spread offense we ran already?

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:
part of all the changes in OC, coaches, systems, etc that Alex played in was his continuing ineptness and lack of consistent results. if he had played very well in his first year and on like a 1st overall should, all the personnel and esp the system around him wouldn't have changed so much. People from within would have been promoted to the OC position to keep the momentum going with Alex's great results, instead of doing brand new OC searches outside of the team. Nolan would have never gotten fired either, most likely, if Smith hadn't kept laying eggs on the field.

we promoted from within and ended up with the hostler. as we all know, that was not the same as norv turners offense. nobody knows what hostler was thinking, not even hostler. nolan sent himself packing by dividing the team and trying to shift all the blame to alex. some of it was his fault but he basically blamed alex for being injured and his doctors cleared him to come back and the re-injury made him miss a good season and a half combined. we wouldve known if alex was gonna amount to anything had nolan not put him in when he wasnt healthy and downplayed his injury. instead alex goes on IR for a year after his still injured comeback and his still recovering shoulder is re inured in camp. it was kind of a blessing tho because now the team looks settled, there is some continuity and alex took a pay cut. that pay cut to me is confidence in his own skills that he can earn big money again. nolan leaving the building was the single best thing that couldve happened for this team, especially the young offensive talent. nolan blamed alex, nolan didnt know how to handle VD, nolan wouldnt play younger guys in favor of people like D-Drop, Morton, Conway or whoever else he brought in to save our receiving corps. good riddance to that clown.

Do you think if we had, say, Drew Brees as QB that he would have struggled under Hostler as well? We may be confusing cause and effect here. I think Smith's historical capabilities, learning curve expediency, and on the field performance could make any OC look mediocre.

steve young and joe montana wouldve looked bad in that offense. hostler wasnt worthy of a waterboy job and he was made the OC. he was the QB coach, how come as soon as he left and smith got another healthy chance to play he impressed? why did jay cutlers numbers drop when he went to chicago? why did steve youngs go up when he came to the 49ers? why did jeff garcia's numbers drop like a brick when he went to cleveland and detroit and then go up again when he went to philly and tampa? the system has a lot to do with the results, as does the supporting talent.

Really? Because Shaun Hill looked GOOD under Hostler. Gee, I wonder why.

I'll wait for the excuse.

shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

Yep, exactly what I though you'd come up with.

The fact of the matter is Shaun Hill was more comfortable and calm than Smith, which allowed him to MAKE PLAYS. I don't give a rats ass if he playing just one quarter all year, the fact is he didn't look like sh*t, as you claim Montana and Young would have. And you say teams figured him out.. What the hell was there to figure out!? He's an average QB that happened to be better than our number 1 draft pick at that time. He wasn't some dynamic QB that threw teams off with his abilities and forced them to "figure him out." Please. He did what Smith couldn't do. Period.

My point is that Hostler's sh*tty system isn't to blame for the things Smith was incapable of (escaping pressure, scanning the field on the run, finding open targets and accurately getting them the football instead of passing it to the fans, for example - all of which Shaun Hill proved capable of doing in just 2 games).

By "figure him out", I believe he is referencing Hill's stellar year last year. Teams figured out he isn't really a threat, closed of the short routes and choked Hill out of a job. Smith came in and made plays. Really, a reverse performance compared to the season you're tlaking about. Hill sucked, Smith came in and made plays. He made the plays Hill couldn't make.

I agree he started to make plays Hill couldn't make, but the system had to be changed for that to happen. Or did you forget the spread offense we ran already?

I didn't forget. He was making plays before the spread emphasis. The spread was made more pravalent because it made Smith more comfortable, and it was working better. Hill was floundering regardless. What is wrong with tweaking an offense to better suit the players? I for one, get tired of seeing two-WR sets ALL GAME LONG. If anything Smith gives Raye more options. I see that as a good thing.

At any rate, the reports of Smith's confidence and command during OTAs are great. But, they are just OTAs. It gives us something to be hopeful for. This season will tell whether Smith is the QB many of us think he can be. He has shown he can make the plays, he just needs consistency. He never had consistency in system until now, let us hope it translates to consistency in his play. If not, he's gone, and the team will be in a much better position (talent-wise) to put a new QB in place and find success compared to when Smith arrived to the train wreck of a team back then.

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:
part of all the changes in OC, coaches, systems, etc that Alex played in was his continuing ineptness and lack of consistent results. if he had played very well in his first year and on like a 1st overall should, all the personnel and esp the system around him wouldn't have changed so much. People from within would have been promoted to the OC position to keep the momentum going with Alex's great results, instead of doing brand new OC searches outside of the team. Nolan would have never gotten fired either, most likely, if Smith hadn't kept laying eggs on the field.

we promoted from within and ended up with the hostler. as we all know, that was not the same as norv turners offense. nobody knows what hostler was thinking, not even hostler. nolan sent himself packing by dividing the team and trying to shift all the blame to alex. some of it was his fault but he basically blamed alex for being injured and his doctors cleared him to come back and the re-injury made him miss a good season and a half combined. we wouldve known if alex was gonna amount to anything had nolan not put him in when he wasnt healthy and downplayed his injury. instead alex goes on IR for a year after his still injured comeback and his still recovering shoulder is re inured in camp. it was kind of a blessing tho because now the team looks settled, there is some continuity and alex took a pay cut. that pay cut to me is confidence in his own skills that he can earn big money again. nolan leaving the building was the single best thing that couldve happened for this team, especially the young offensive talent. nolan blamed alex, nolan didnt know how to handle VD, nolan wouldnt play younger guys in favor of people like D-Drop, Morton, Conway or whoever else he brought in to save our receiving corps. good riddance to that clown.

Do you think if we had, say, Drew Brees as QB that he would have struggled under Hostler as well? We may be confusing cause and effect here. I think Smith's historical capabilities, learning curve expediency, and on the field performance could make any OC look mediocre.

steve young and joe montana wouldve looked bad in that offense. hostler wasnt worthy of a waterboy job and he was made the OC. he was the QB coach, how come as soon as he left and smith got another healthy chance to play he impressed? why did jay cutlers numbers drop when he went to chicago? why did steve youngs go up when he came to the 49ers? why did jeff garcia's numbers drop like a brick when he went to cleveland and detroit and then go up again when he went to philly and tampa? the system has a lot to do with the results, as does the supporting talent.

Really? Because Shaun Hill looked GOOD under Hostler. Gee, I wonder why.

I'll wait for the excuse.

shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

Yep, exactly what I though you'd come up with.

The fact of the matter is Shaun Hill was more comfortable and calm than Smith, which allowed him to MAKE PLAYS. I don't give a rats ass if he playing just one quarter all year, the fact is he didn't look like sh*t, as you claim Montana and Young would have. And you say teams figured him out.. What the hell was there to figure out!? He's an average QB that happened to be better than our number 1 draft pick at that time. He wasn't some dynamic QB that threw teams off with his abilities and forced them to "figure him out." Please. He did what Smith couldn't do. Period.

My point is that Hostler's sh*tty system isn't to blame for the things Smith was incapable of (escaping pressure, scanning the field on the run, finding open targets and accurately getting them the football instead of passing it to the fans, for example - all of which Shaun Hill proved capable of doing in just 2 games).

By "figure him out", I believe he is referencing Hill's stellar year last year. Teams figured out he isn't really a threat, closed of the short routes and choked Hill out of a job. Smith came in and made plays. Really, a reverse performance compared to the season you're tlaking about. Hill sucked, Smith came in and made plays. He made the plays Hill couldn't make.

I agree he started to make plays Hill couldn't make, but the system had to be changed for that to happen. Or did you forget the spread offense we ran already?

I didn't forget. He was making plays before the spread emphasis. The spread was made more pravalent because it made Smith more comfortable, and it was working better. Hill was floundering regardless. What is wrong with tweaking an offense to better suit the players? I for one, get tired of seeing two-WR sets ALL GAME LONG. If anything Smith gives Raye more options. I see that as a good thing.

At any rate, the reports of Smith's confidence and command during OTAs are great. But, they are just OTAs. It gives us something to be hopeful for. This season will tell whether Smith is the QB many of us think he can be. He has shown he can make the plays, he just needs consistency. He never had consistency in system until now, let us hope it translates to consistency in his play. If not, he's gone, and the team will be in a much better position (talent-wise) to put a new QB in place and find success compared to when Smith arrived to the train wreck of a team back then.

Well if I recall correctly, we started using that shotgun spread in the 2nd half of the Texans game (when Smith first came in) and it stuck with us for the rest of the year. There's nothing wrong with changing your offense to better suit your QB, but there's a reason the spread offense is successful in college, but fails in the NFL. It worked out well for us last season, but don't expect to see us utilizing it as much this year. Once defenses commit to us using a spread offense, they will eat us alive. Only Peyton Manning gets away with that type of offense.

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:
part of all the changes in OC, coaches, systems, etc that Alex played in was his continuing ineptness and lack of consistent results. if he had played very well in his first year and on like a 1st overall should, all the personnel and esp the system around him wouldn't have changed so much. People from within would have been promoted to the OC position to keep the momentum going with Alex's great results, instead of doing brand new OC searches outside of the team. Nolan would have never gotten fired either, most likely, if Smith hadn't kept laying eggs on the field.

we promoted from within and ended up with the hostler. as we all know, that was not the same as norv turners offense. nobody knows what hostler was thinking, not even hostler. nolan sent himself packing by dividing the team and trying to shift all the blame to alex. some of it was his fault but he basically blamed alex for being injured and his doctors cleared him to come back and the re-injury made him miss a good season and a half combined. we wouldve known if alex was gonna amount to anything had nolan not put him in when he wasnt healthy and downplayed his injury. instead alex goes on IR for a year after his still injured comeback and his still recovering shoulder is re inured in camp. it was kind of a blessing tho because now the team looks settled, there is some continuity and alex took a pay cut. that pay cut to me is confidence in his own skills that he can earn big money again. nolan leaving the building was the single best thing that couldve happened for this team, especially the young offensive talent. nolan blamed alex, nolan didnt know how to handle VD, nolan wouldnt play younger guys in favor of people like D-Drop, Morton, Conway or whoever else he brought in to save our receiving corps. good riddance to that clown.

Do you think if we had, say, Drew Brees as QB that he would have struggled under Hostler as well? We may be confusing cause and effect here. I think Smith's historical capabilities, learning curve expediency, and on the field performance could make any OC look mediocre.

steve young and joe montana wouldve looked bad in that offense. hostler wasnt worthy of a waterboy job and he was made the OC. he was the QB coach, how come as soon as he left and smith got another healthy chance to play he impressed? why did jay cutlers numbers drop when he went to chicago? why did steve youngs go up when he came to the 49ers? why did jeff garcia's numbers drop like a brick when he went to cleveland and detroit and then go up again when he went to philly and tampa? the system has a lot to do with the results, as does the supporting talent.

Really? Because Shaun Hill looked GOOD under Hostler. Gee, I wonder why.

I'll wait for the excuse.

shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

Yep, exactly what I though you'd come up with.

The fact of the matter is Shaun Hill was more comfortable and calm than Smith, which allowed him to MAKE PLAYS. I don't give a rats ass if he playing just one quarter all year, the fact is he didn't look like sh*t, as you claim Montana and Young would have. And you say teams figured him out.. What the hell was there to figure out!? He's an average QB that happened to be better than our number 1 draft pick at that time. He wasn't some dynamic QB that threw teams off with his abilities and forced them to "figure him out." Please. He did what Smith couldn't do. Period.

My point is that Hostler's sh*tty system isn't to blame for the things Smith was incapable of (escaping pressure, scanning the field on the run, finding open targets and accurately getting them the football instead of passing it to the fans, for example - all of which Shaun Hill proved capable of doing in just 2 games).

By "figure him out", I believe he is referencing Hill's stellar year last year. Teams figured out he isn't really a threat, closed of the short routes and choked Hill out of a job. Smith came in and made plays. Really, a reverse performance compared to the season you're tlaking about. Hill sucked, Smith came in and made plays. He made the plays Hill couldn't make.

I agree he started to make plays Hill couldn't make, but the system had to be changed for that to happen. Or did you forget the spread offense we ran already?

I didn't forget. He was making plays before the spread emphasis. The spread was made more pravalent because it made Smith more comfortable, and it was working better. Hill was floundering regardless. What is wrong with tweaking an offense to better suit the players? I for one, get tired of seeing two-WR sets ALL GAME LONG. If anything Smith gives Raye more options. I see that as a good thing.

At any rate, the reports of Smith's confidence and command during OTAs are great. But, they are just OTAs. It gives us something to be hopeful for. This season will tell whether Smith is the QB many of us think he can be. He has shown he can make the plays, he just needs consistency. He never had consistency in system until now, let us hope it translates to consistency in his play. If not, he's gone, and the team will be in a much better position (talent-wise) to put a new QB in place and find success compared to when Smith arrived to the train wreck of a team back then.

Well if I recall correctly, we started using that shotgun spread in the 2nd half of the Texans game (when Smith first came in) and it stuck with us for the rest of the year. There's nothing wrong with changing your offense to better suit your QB, but there's a reason the spread offense is successful in college, but fails in the NFL. It worked out well for us last season, but don't expect to see us utilizing it as much this year. Once defenses commit to us using a spread offense, they will eat us alive. Only Peyton Manning gets away with that type of offense.

I agree there shouldn't be any exclusivity to the shotgun sets. But, it is a nice flavor to have as a staple tool that could help regain control of a game. Never hurts to find a QBs comfort zone, I hope they have been using the OTAs and then TC to expand that comfort zone though.

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by Shaj:
part of all the changes in OC, coaches, systems, etc that Alex played in was his continuing ineptness and lack of consistent results. if he had played very well in his first year and on like a 1st overall should, all the personnel and esp the system around him wouldn't have changed so much. People from within would have been promoted to the OC position to keep the momentum going with Alex's great results, instead of doing brand new OC searches outside of the team. Nolan would have never gotten fired either, most likely, if Smith hadn't kept laying eggs on the field.

we promoted from within and ended up with the hostler. as we all know, that was not the same as norv turners offense. nobody knows what hostler was thinking, not even hostler. nolan sent himself packing by dividing the team and trying to shift all the blame to alex. some of it was his fault but he basically blamed alex for being injured and his doctors cleared him to come back and the re-injury made him miss a good season and a half combined. we wouldve known if alex was gonna amount to anything had nolan not put him in when he wasnt healthy and downplayed his injury. instead alex goes on IR for a year after his still injured comeback and his still recovering shoulder is re inured in camp. it was kind of a blessing tho because now the team looks settled, there is some continuity and alex took a pay cut. that pay cut to me is confidence in his own skills that he can earn big money again. nolan leaving the building was the single best thing that couldve happened for this team, especially the young offensive talent. nolan blamed alex, nolan didnt know how to handle VD, nolan wouldnt play younger guys in favor of people like D-Drop, Morton, Conway or whoever else he brought in to save our receiving corps. good riddance to that clown.

Do you think if we had, say, Drew Brees as QB that he would have struggled under Hostler as well? We may be confusing cause and effect here. I think Smith's historical capabilities, learning curve expediency, and on the field performance could make any OC look mediocre.

steve young and joe montana wouldve looked bad in that offense. hostler wasnt worthy of a waterboy job and he was made the OC. he was the QB coach, how come as soon as he left and smith got another healthy chance to play he impressed? why did jay cutlers numbers drop when he went to chicago? why did steve youngs go up when he came to the 49ers? why did jeff garcia's numbers drop like a brick when he went to cleveland and detroit and then go up again when he went to philly and tampa? the system has a lot to do with the results, as does the supporting talent.

Really? Because Shaun Hill looked GOOD under Hostler. Gee, I wonder why.

I'll wait for the excuse.

shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

Yep, exactly what I though you'd come up with.

The fact of the matter is Shaun Hill was more comfortable and calm than Smith, which allowed him to MAKE PLAYS. I don't give a rats ass if he playing just one quarter all year, the fact is he didn't look like sh*t, as you claim Montana and Young would have. And you say teams figured him out.. What the hell was there to figure out!? He's an average QB that happened to be better than our number 1 draft pick at that time. He wasn't some dynamic QB that threw teams off with his abilities and forced them to "figure him out." Please. He did what Smith couldn't do. Period.

My point is that Hostler's sh*tty system isn't to blame for the things Smith was incapable of (escaping pressure, scanning the field on the run, finding open targets and accurately getting them the football instead of passing it to the fans, for example - all of which Shaun Hill proved capable of doing in just 2 games).

By "figure him out", I believe he is referencing Hill's stellar year last year. Teams figured out he isn't really a threat, closed of the short routes and choked Hill out of a job. Smith came in and made plays. Really, a reverse performance compared to the season you're tlaking about. Hill sucked, Smith came in and made plays. He made the plays Hill couldn't make.

I agree he started to make plays Hill couldn't make, but the system had to be changed for that to happen. Or did you forget the spread offense we ran already?

I didn't forget. He was making plays before the spread emphasis. The spread was made more pravalent because it made Smith more comfortable, and it was working better. Hill was floundering regardless. What is wrong with tweaking an offense to better suit the players? I for one, get tired of seeing two-WR sets ALL GAME LONG. If anything Smith gives Raye more options. I see that as a good thing.

At any rate, the reports of Smith's confidence and command during OTAs are great. But, they are just OTAs. It gives us something to be hopeful for. This season will tell whether Smith is the QB many of us think he can be. He has shown he can make the plays, he just needs consistency. He never had consistency in system until now, let us hope it translates to consistency in his play. If not, he's gone, and the team will be in a much better position (talent-wise) to put a new QB in place and find success compared to when Smith arrived to the train wreck of a team back then.

Well if I recall correctly, we started using that shotgun spread in the 2nd half of the Texans game (when Smith first came in) and it stuck with us for the rest of the year. There's nothing wrong with changing your offense to better suit your QB, but there's a reason the spread offense is successful in college, but fails in the NFL. It worked out well for us last season, but don't expect to see us utilizing it as much this year. Once defenses commit to us using a spread offense, they will eat us alive. Only Peyton Manning gets away with that type of offense.

I agree there shouldn't be any exclusivity to the shotgun sets. But, it is a nice flavor to have as a staple tool that could help regain control of a game. Never hurts to find a QBs comfort zone, I hope they have been using the OTAs and then TC to expand that comfort zone though.

I agree with you. Unfortunately, Smith's comfort zone is provided by a style of offense that doesn't work for very long in the pros. So, yeah, hopefully they are expanding that comfort zone and helping him become more comfortable under center.

At this point, it's quite an assumption to state what Smith's comfort zone really is. Truth is, there is no reason to think he can't handle his business in either situation. The consistency of offense, the upgrades of OL (including OL coaches)... and the growing experience of receivers... Smith should finish the year out in the approximate range of 89-95 QBR. That should put us in the playoffs, and give us all more faith in the immediate future.

Quote:
Under Center: 65-of-109 for 776 yards, eight touchdowns, six interceptions, 13 sacks and an 83 rating.

In the gun: 160-of-263 for 1,574 yards, 10 tds, six picks, nine sacks, and an 81 rating.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ninerinsider/detail?blogid=45&entry_id=66880#ixzz0sNdtCJL7

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
How is "our offensive discontinuity is at least 50% due to Smith's perennial incompetence"?

His OC's weren't fired because of lack of production, they were hired away to head coaching gigs - we could not prevent this.

In fact, the only OCs who were fired in the last few years were Hostler and Martz. Smith only played in 3 regular games with Hostler as OC and 0 regular season games with Martz as OC.

Hence, Smith is NOT the reason for the offensive discontinuity. Your viewpoint is incorrect.

-9fA

BAM! The truth is laid bare for the haters.

~Ceadder

The "truth" is that Smith couldn't play well enough to play under either one of them. I can't remember if he was injured during the Hostler regime, but he certainly didn't show what Martz needed to see to suit him up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "truth" is that Smith has not won a single training camp battle in his career yet. His second year with Turner as OC may be the exception.

what you guys call the truth reminds me of what religious zealots call the truth. you see what you want to see.

On that topic, what I want to see is Smith light it up. I'm still waiting.

You still didn't answer the question.

-9fA

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
How is "our offensive discontinuity is at least 50% due to Smith's perennial incompetence"?

His OC's weren't fired because of lack of production, they were hired away to head coaching gigs - we could not prevent this.

In fact, the only OCs who were fired in the last few years were Hostler and Martz. Smith only played in 3 regular games with Hostler as OC and 0 regular season games with Martz as OC.

Hence, Smith is NOT the reason for the offensive discontinuity. Your viewpoint is incorrect.

-9fA

BAM! The truth is laid bare for the haters.

~Ceadder

The "truth" is that Smith couldn't play well enough to play under either one of them. I can't remember if he was injured during the Hostler regime, but he certainly didn't show what Martz needed to see to suit him up. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "truth" is that Smith has not won a single training camp battle in his career yet. His second year with Turner as OC may be the exception.

what you guys call the truth reminds me of what religious zealots call the truth. you see what you want to see.

On that topic, what I want to see is Smith light it up. I'm still waiting.

WTF?

Dude just stop. Smith played Fine his first three games under Hostler. 2-1 REMEMBER? His shoulder was doing the ole thumpity thump thump of a flat tire when Martz was here.

So please take your unreasonable garbage someplace else you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Damn armchair personnel men piss me off.

When you get hit as much as our guy did you'd have issues too. How bout this go root for the this years Super Bowl winner and then go root for the next years and so on and so forth and you will never again be unhappy with anyone on the team.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by English:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by redrathman:

Originally posted by Shaj:
#1 - Has Alex Smith met expectations as a #1 overall pick? Y or N

#2 - Would you pick somone else if you could redo the 2005 draft? Y or N

#3 - If Smith was a 4th round pick, would he still be on this team? Y or N

#4 - In your heart of hearts, do you believe Smith is the guy that can get us our sixth ring? Y or N

Your preoccupation to label Smith and provide a definitive opinion of him is the sole reason we disagree here.

Originally posted by Shaj:
And like I said before, I will be Smith's biggest fan if he pulls it together
this season. I just don't have a lot of hope, and my bar is set higher than most everyone else's here. We're also in the weakest division, so that's
one less Alexcuse to worry about. let's see what happens.

Just like every 49er fan that doubted Steve Young in 1988 became his biggest fan when he won in 1994.

sorry bro, but the Steve Young analogy is the lamest ever. It's the most tired and ill conceived analogy type that the zone uses to draw incorrect
conclusions. It goes something along these lines:

"this person [insert name here] stunk it up early
in their career and later was a hall of famer, therefore Alex Smith also has that chance."

And then names like Terry Bradshaw and Troy
Aikman and Steve Young are inserted to justify this rationale. It's the same as having a kid who gets straight D's in school and saying "Einstein got
bad grades in school, therefore my kid has a chance to be the next Einstein." See how lame
that is?

That sort of logic may make you feel warm and
get other zoners excited as they think you have a great command of "the truth" (the real truth being that Smith is a borderline bust to date in
his career), but it doesn't pass the test of logic.

Nothing personal, bro. I think you are a well
intentioned fan who also takes the time to try and pull data together. I want Smith to be really
successful too.

Shaj, all the guy is saying in his last is that when a guy breaks through, everyone all of a sudden jumps on the bandwagon. How can you argue with this?

The Einstein analogy is right out the window. It's completely irrelevant to his post. He isn't saying Alex is the next Steve. He is just making the point about the bandwagon effect.

Indeed, as Shaj was all about how we should've drafted Merriman, now he's all about we should've drafted Rogers. Give it a rest already.

I still would have been happy with Merriman, even with his recent injury history. Rodgers as well. Merriman proved himself right away, Rodgers when given the chance. Smith has done neither.

but wow, people are really bashing me. The thing is, I love this team so much that it just tears me apart to see someone laying eggs on the field. I just can't handle it. It eats me alive. You have no idea. Everything in my life is 49ers - my phone #, my passwords, my custom license plate, my game room, everything. you guys have no idea how personal I take it when we don't have the very best at QB leading this team. I have zero patience for ineptitude or excuses, just none. You can call that bashing or b***hing or whatever, but I'm sure if Eddie D were as patient and understanding as you guys, we'd have zero rings. Note that I am NOT comparing myself to Eddie D in any capacity, I'm just saying that being a fan does not mean unequivocal support for every player. It means unequivocal support for the team.

So you have no problems that Merriman was a product of Roids?

Notice how his career took a nosedive to "average" after he got suspended.

But I find it laughable that you bring up Eddie and past players to suit your agenda but we can't point out that other greats who started out not so great and then turned it around. As you reminded us, one of those was Bradshaw. The man was WELL into his career before he had success. Same for a few others like Plunkett. You think we would have let Plunkett go to the Raiders if we had the Crystal Ball you have at your disposal? Not F'N hardly.

I don't discount what you're saying because I know a good part of that to be true. But stuff your BS about how it's inappropriate to bring up other instances of Bad turned Good players. If it didn't apply I wouldn't have ever pointed this stuff out.

You act like you're the only fan to not be happy with Smith's career. Newsflash. You aren't.

The difference between you and me? I don't make unreasonable demands of our players. I want them to succeed. But it they're on their Back, I don't expect them to throw Ropes with laserlike precision into the End Zone. Cause it AIN'T gonna F'n happen.

~Ceadder:drink:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Damn armchair personnel men piss me off.

Do you seriously not understand that you yourself are "armchair personnel?" Just because you're swinging from Smith's privates doesn't mean you're any different from someone "hating" on him. You're sitting on your ass making excuses for Smith while others are sitting on our asses pointing out flaws in his game.

You need to get a clue.

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by fastforward:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

It's also worth pointing out that by that time Ted Tollner had started giving Hostler "advices." Even the geriatric Trent Dilfer won a game with the best passing of his 49ers career, throwing 2 TDs against the Cardinals.

It's also worth noting that the play calling didn't change Much after Tollner started giving those "advices." It was still ridiculously predictable. What changed? The QB play.

SMITH WAS F'N INJURED!!! Are you seriously this Daft or do you just like doing this to get under peoples skins?

Of course the play changed. I'm not even going to address that weak armed excuse for a QB, cause even then his only relevance to this debate is that he was healthy and Smith was not. That's it. He was no more accurate. He didn't scramble any better. If he has downfield vision you couldn't tell cause he can't throw it farther than 15-20 yards without some serious wobble on it. 5 yard dinks and dunks and you act like he's the second coming of Montana. No offense and not being racist, but NiGG@ Please!

~Ceadder

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Damn armchair personnel men piss me off.

Do you seriously not understand that you yourself are "armchair personnel?" Just because you're swinging from Smith's privates doesn't mean you're any different from someone "hating" on him. You're sitting on your ass making excuses for Smith while others are sitting on our asses pointing out flaws in his game.

You need to get a clue.

Okay that's it. WHERE have you EVER see me actually STATE unequivocally, that Smith is THE guy?

You can swing from MY privates now cause Armchair Personnel Men make DEFINITIVE judgements based on nothing. I've never done that so you can pucker up and kiss my ass.

~Ceadder

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by fastforward:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

It's also worth pointing out that by that time Ted Tollner had started giving Hostler "advices." Even the geriatric Trent Dilfer won a game with the best passing of his 49ers career, throwing 2 TDs against the Cardinals.

It's also worth noting that the play calling didn't change Much after Tollner started giving those "advices." It was still ridiculously predictable. What changed? The QB play.

SMITH WAS F'N INJURED!!! Are you seriously this Daft or do you just like doing this to get under peoples skins?

Of course the play changed. I'm not even going to address that weak armed excuse for a QB, cause even then his only relevance to this debate is that he was healthy and Smith was not. That's it. He was no more accurate. He didn't scramble any better. If he has downfield vision you couldn't tell cause he can't throw it farther than 15-20 yards without some serious wobble on it. 5 yard dinks and dunks and you act like he's the second coming of Montana. No offense and not being racist, but NiGG@ Please!

~Ceadder

In the first 3 games that you credit Smith with looking good in, HE DID NOT. The whole offense looked like garbage. Smith was no exception and actually had a lot to do with how poorly the offense did. Only someone with their head up Smith's ass can't see that. THIS WAS BEFORE HE GOT INJURED SO SAVE THE GODD*MN EXCUSES ALREADY! And in case you wanna bring up the 2-1 record, we got lucky against the Rams and should have been 1-2, only having won the Turd Bowl on Monday Night against the Cardinals - a game in which both teams looked HORRIBLE.

By the way, where do you see me acting like Hill is the "2nd coming of Montana?" You sure think you know how to twist words up to win your arguments, don't you? Well, you don't. You try, but you fail. I only said Hill didn't look bad, and in fact, looked GOOD, under Hostler's offense when the other dude tried to say even Montana and Young would have looked bad. I never said Hill should have stayed, I never said Hill was a good QB because in actuality, he's no more than average - just like Smith. As a matter of fact, Hill was only brought up because of the "Montana would have looked bad in that offense" statement.

Get off your imaginary pedestal already. Your smugness is pathetic.

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:
Damn armchair personnel men piss me off.

Do you seriously not understand that you yourself are "armchair personnel?" Just because you're swinging from Smith's privates doesn't mean you're any different from someone "hating" on him. You're sitting on your ass making excuses for Smith while others are sitting on our asses pointing out flaws in his game.

You need to get a clue.

Okay that's it. WHERE have you EVER see me actually STATE unequivocally, that Smith is THE guy?

You can swing from MY privates now cause Armchair Personnel Men make DEFINITIVE judgements based on nothing. I've never done that so you can pucker up and kiss my ass.

~Ceadder

Oh wait, I forgot, you like to make up your own meanings to words and phrases. I'll remember next time.

What a joke.

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by Ceadderman:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by fastforward:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
shaun hill looked good under hostler because he only started two games and people didnt know a damn thing about him. kind of like a new pitcher in baseball, people didnt have a scouting report on him because he was a bench warmer his entire career. look at what happened to the great shaun hill last year when people figured him out. what was 3 games without a TD? is that the shaun hill your talking about? that year he beat the 7-9 bengals and a bucs team that rested almost all of its defensive starters by the 2nd quarter. dont make it out like shaun was awesome that year because he didnt play any awesome teams. and two games is really not that good a measuring stick.

It's also worth pointing out that by that time Ted Tollner had started giving Hostler "advices." Even the geriatric Trent Dilfer won a game with the best passing of his 49ers career, throwing 2 TDs against the Cardinals.

It's also worth noting that the play calling didn't change Much after Tollner started giving those "advices." It was still ridiculously predictable. What changed? The QB play.

SMITH WAS F'N INJURED!!! Are you seriously this Daft or do you just like doing this to get under peoples skins?

Of course the play changed. I'm not even going to address that weak armed excuse for a QB, cause even then his only relevance to this debate is that he was healthy and Smith was not. That's it. He was no more accurate. He didn't scramble any better. If he has downfield vision you couldn't tell cause he can't throw it farther than 15-20 yards without some serious wobble on it. 5 yard dinks and dunks and you act like he's the second coming of Montana. No offense and not being racist, but NiGG@ Please!

~Ceadder

In the first 3 games that you credit Smith with looking good in, HE DID NOT. The whole offense looked like garbage. Smith was no exception and actually had a lot to do with how poorly the offense did. Only someone with their head up Smith's ass can't see that. THIS WAS BEFORE HE GOT INJURED SO SAVE THE GODD*MN EXCUSES ALREADY! And in case you wanna bring up the 2-1 record, we got lucky against the Rams and should have been 1-2, only having won the Turd Bowl on Monday Night against the Cardinals - a game in which both teams looked HORRIBLE.

By the way, where do you see me acting like Hill is the "2nd coming of Montana?" You sure think you know how to twist words up to win your arguments, don't you? Well, you don't. You try, but you fail. I only said Hill didn't look bad, and in fact, looked GOOD, under Hostler's offense when the other dude tried to say even Montana and Young would have looked bad. I never said Hill should have stayed, I never said Hill was a good QB because in actuality, he's no more than average - just like Smith. As a matter of fact, Hill was only brought up because of the "Montana would have looked bad in that offense" statement.

Get off your imaginary pedestal already. Your smugness is pathetic.

Piss off. You act like he's the only reason the Offense didn't play well. Oh gee ummm I guess a ROOKIE OC didn't have ANYTHING AT ALL to do with that?

Your whining is what is pathetic. I swear dude if I had to hear it in person I would seriously consider one of two things.

Either I would put a gun in my mouth and end it all.

Or

I would straight up bust you in the mouth to give you something to whine about.

In the end I think I would just let you prattle on move to the end of the bar so I could drink my drink, pay the tab leave a nice tip to the Bartender who had to put up with you and leave quietly before I ended my day on a sour note.

Screw your "excuses" you unreasonable turd.

~Ceadder