What if Alex Smith was drafted by Andy Reid?

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Rodgers= exactly how you develop a QB and help your franchise.

Smith= exactly how you fvck up a QB and set back your franchise.

The answer to the OPs question lies in Green Bay. Rodgers went through the exact opposite of what Smith went through and the results show. Obviously Rodgers was more pro ready so it's not a total apples to apples comparison but it's safe to assume Alex would be FAR better off had him and Rodgers switched places.

You have a fallacy in your logic. You are assuming that because Rodgers was groomed behind a future HOF and with staffing/system continuity, that he was therefore successful - when you cannot prove that he would not have been very successful coming straight out of the chute like Ryan, Roethlisberger, Flacco, and many others.

Smith would have laid eggs no matter the circumstances. He doesn't have leadership, instinct, or accuracy. Every one of those in and of themselves is a fatal flaw for a QB. Smith has managed to fail at all three. You could put him behind Montana for 5 years and still not see better results. Most notable is that leadership and instinct cannot be taught, and accuracy is damn hard to coach in someone who just doesn't have it.

I see this a lot in my psych wards. Its called denial........when you dont have answers, you just laugh it off.........


He's right. I think you guys overrate what Favre's tutelage did for Rodgers. If anything, what did Alex do the 2 years he sat on the bench and had an opportunity to learn from others ? Pretty much nothing....

wow, that is an incredible "counter-point" that I never thought. LOL, that dismisses every argument people have regarding Rodgers having the advantage for getting to ride the pine for 2 years and just observe. For that matter, Smith got to ride the pine with more real insight to NFL Quarterbacking than Rodgers did, giving Smith the advantage.

WOW! You are just wrong, my friend. At NO TIME that Smith has been on the 49ers has he had ANYTHING even close to the quality of coaching that Rodgers has had the entire time he has been at GB. The best thing he had was Trent Dilfer, a guy who wasn't good enough at it to even get a sniff from any other team. He can't get a coaching job from anyone, even now.

Time spent on the bench is of no value unless there is coaching available that can actually teach.

You're trying to compare Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the PLAYERS. What we should really look at is Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the MENTORS. In that respect, Dilfer probably had a lot more to offer to Smith than Favre did to Rodgers. Remember, Favre has always been a selfish in that he looks out for himself above all others. Thats why he's always willing to keep teams hanging til the final moments until he announces his return.

Alex Smith, despite not watching a HOF.........still has the chance to learn from a Superbowl Champion quarterback. No one says he had to learn the offensive system, but that was the time to learn the intricacies of the position eg reading defenses, pocket presence, instinct, anticipation.

He didnt.

Did you just try to say that watching Dilfer would be a bigger advantage than watching Favre?

LEARNING from Dilfer would be a bigger advantage, because Dilfer is more likely to offer pointers on the intricacies of the game, whereas Favre is not. From what I can remember from the Favre era in GB, announcers used to say that Favre wasnt a good mentor for Rodgers because he played unorthodox and took too many risks. Despite that, I think Dilfer would be a better person to talk to on the sidelines than Favre. Do you disagree ?

Originally posted by carlgo:
Smith would have been better if he had been brought up to a perfect environment.

If he went to almost any other team now he would be better than he has been here.

But, "better" is really just sort of ok. His touch, his accuracy, the quickness of release, the intuition is not up with the best of them. He would have been sort of average and some guy would have come along and dethroned him after a couple of years and he would have a career as an often-traded backup.

Here, nobody was allowed to compete with him, one of the strangest things in the history of the game. If there had been open and honest competition here, Smith probably would have be replaced some time ago.

Actually, the no-competition thing is so awful that I feel sorry for Smith. That bonehead idea wasn't his fault and makes him look really bad. I don't buy into any idea that he is mentally weak or any of that garbage, just that he isn't the savior type.

Your post got lost in all the jumble, but you're spot on in your assessment. Although Alex would be better in a more stable environment, he would still be a liability in a game where he would be forced to improvise. Alex is truly a systems quarterback. He needs the right personnel around him doing all the right things, combined with the perfect coordinator calling the plays that tailor to his strengths. Anything outside those realms, and he gets lost.

Alex could maybe win a title playing for the 2000 Ravens or maybe even the 2007 Chicago Bears (assuming he kept the TOs down), but he certainly would not succeed for any of the teams where QB/offensive play was highly dependent upon.

All in all, the guy is a bust-below average player for us..........potential of becoming an average player on another team. Certainly not a superstar in the making.

Good assessment.

Originally posted by Leathaface:


I don't even hate Smith. I root for him on the field...I just don't think he is/was any good.

Oh, I don't think there are many people who actually "hate" Smith. That's a pretty strong word....

I think the question posed in this thread is if things would have been different if he were drafted by Andy Reid. Personally, I don't f**king know.

I'm just saying... it's obvious you have a strong opinion about the kid's abilities. I was just offering some friendly advice (I mean that sincerely) about how strong you make that opinion. You're a smart dude, I don't want you to get me wrong. Just try to remember that none of us really knows anything for sure.

Statistically speaking, your reasoning is sound. It's just impossible to answer this hypothetical with an absolute.

s**t, even guys like Stephen Hawking get s**t wrong and admit it. He even admitted to being wrong about something that was named after him. Hawking radiation.... law of conservation of information bit him. Well, theoretically of course.

^The best we can offer is our opinions. You're right, we'll never know with 100% certainty.

With regards to developing QBs, I personally am of the opinion that most QBs are intrinsically more adept to playing at the NFL level by the time they're drafted. Of course coaching helps, but the most important qualities for a QB can't be taught. They're learned early on. IMO, of course.

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Rodgers= exactly how you develop a QB and help your franchise.

Smith= exactly how you fvck up a QB and set back your franchise.

The answer to the OPs question lies in Green Bay. Rodgers went through the exact opposite of what Smith went through and the results show. Obviously Rodgers was more pro ready so it's not a total apples to apples comparison but it's safe to assume Alex would be FAR better off had him and Rodgers switched places.

You have a fallacy in your logic. You are assuming that because Rodgers was groomed behind a future HOF and with staffing/system continuity, that he was therefore successful - when you cannot prove that he would not have been very successful coming straight out of the chute like Ryan, Roethlisberger, Flacco, and many others.

Smith would have laid eggs no matter the circumstances. He doesn't have leadership, instinct, or accuracy. Every one of those in and of themselves is a fatal flaw for a QB. Smith has managed to fail at all three. You could put him behind Montana for 5 years and still not see better results. Most notable is that leadership and instinct cannot be taught, and accuracy is damn hard to coach in someone who just doesn't have it.

I see this a lot in my psych wards. Its called denial........when you dont have answers, you just laugh it off.........


He's right. I think you guys overrate what Favre's tutelage did for Rodgers. If anything, what did Alex do the 2 years he sat on the bench and had an opportunity to learn from others ? Pretty much nothing....

wow, that is an incredible "counter-point" that I never thought. LOL, that dismisses every argument people have regarding Rodgers having the advantage for getting to ride the pine for 2 years and just observe. For that matter, Smith got to ride the pine with more real insight to NFL Quarterbacking than Rodgers did, giving Smith the advantage.

WOW! You are just wrong, my friend. At NO TIME that Smith has been on the 49ers has he had ANYTHING even close to the quality of coaching that Rodgers has had the entire time he has been at GB. The best thing he had was Trent Dilfer, a guy who wasn't good enough at it to even get a sniff from any other team. He can't get a coaching job from anyone, even now.

Time spent on the bench is of no value unless there is coaching available that can actually teach.

You're trying to compare Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the PLAYERS. What we should really look at is Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the MENTORS. In that respect, Dilfer probably had a lot more to offer to Smith than Favre did to Rodgers. Remember, Favre has always been a selfish in that he looks out for himself above all others. Thats why he's always willing to keep teams hanging til the final moments until he announces his return.

Alex Smith, despite not watching a HOF.........still has the chance to learn from a Superbowl Champion quarterback. No one says he had to learn the offensive system, but that was the time to learn the intricacies of the position eg reading defenses, pocket presence, instinct, anticipation.

He didnt.

Did you just try to say that watching Dilfer would be a bigger advantage than watching Favre?

LEARNING from Dilfer would be a bigger advantage, because Dilfer is more likely to offer pointers on the intricacies of the game, whereas Favre is not. From what I can remember from the Favre era in GB, announcers used to say that Favre wasnt a good mentor for Rodgers because he played unorthodox and took too many risks. Despite that, I think Dilfer would be a better person to talk to on the sidelines than Favre. Do you disagree ?

It's not like Rodgers is Favre's only backup to have success. Hassleback, Marc Brunell both had very good careers after sitting behind Favre all those years.

You get to watch a legend and get coached up by very good offensive minds. It's a pretty big advantage over what most quarterbacks especially Alex go thru. I jumped off the Alex bandwagon a long time ago but there are some points you have to conceed. Sitting behind Favre is definetily an advantage over 6 coordinators in 6 years.

No way would Smith have thesame career as Rodgers if Smith went to GB. Here are some very important reasons why:
1. Mentality: Smith was drafted because he was a yes man with a step aside personality. We did not draft Rodgers because he displayed a little more resistance. This directly points to how one carries out the plays as designed opposed to the other. This directly points to Smih never deviated from the play or improvising which we HAVE seen Rodgers do.

2. Situation: It was more difficult for Rodgers than you think. Farce was not open and volunteer his knowledge unless Rodgers came to him. This was reported. Alex had everyone willing to help him. Rodgers overcame a difficult situation where Farve refuse to let him have any chance whereas Smith was coddled into being prodded every chance. Rodgers also had two different OCs in two years but that didn't mess his mentality for the game up.

To say a player who showed a passive personality who performs everything to the script would play the same as a player who didn't display this personality when drafted is ridiculous. This is the reason why we see Rodgers make some crazy tight throws and Smih pass them up.

Now factor in other physical attributes that have nothing to do with experience and Smith fails.

Originally posted by ApatheticIAm:
Do you think he would have been a better QB? Do you think a coach like Reid could have brought the best out of him and make him a pro bowler?

who cares???

Originally posted by ZRF80:

All in all, the guy is a bust-below average player for us..........potential of becoming an average player on another team. Certainly not a superstar in the making.

Good assessment.

I'd say it's more difficult to fully assess his potential with another team, but I agree that he was likely never going to be a superstar. It really was awful luck for us to have the #1 pick in that draft. I don't think there was any QB good enough to come into a bad situation and succeed.

When we drafted Smith my highest expectation was that he'd have career numbers like Troy Aikman... who I think may be the most overrated QB of all time. Surround that with talent and you know what happened.

Looked to be headed in the right direction for one season. Total train wreck after that.

Sometimes, I really feel there is some sort of curse on this team.

Originally posted by Leathaface:
^The best we can offer is our opinions. You're right, we'll never know with 100% certainty.

With regards to developing QBs, I personally am of the opinion that most QBs are intrinsically more adept to playing at the NFL level by the time they're drafted. Of course coaching helps, but the most important qualities for a QB can't be taught. They're learned early on. IMO, of course.

Yeah, see my response to Z.

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Rodgers= exactly how you develop a QB and help your franchise.

Smith= exactly how you fvck up a QB and set back your franchise.

The answer to the OPs question lies in Green Bay. Rodgers went through the exact opposite of what Smith went through and the results show. Obviously Rodgers was more pro ready so it's not a total apples to apples comparison but it's safe to assume Alex would be FAR better off had him and Rodgers switched places.

You have a fallacy in your logic. You are assuming that because Rodgers was groomed behind a future HOF and with staffing/system continuity, that he was therefore successful - when you cannot prove that he would not have been very successful coming straight out of the chute like Ryan, Roethlisberger, Flacco, and many others.

Smith would have laid eggs no matter the circumstances. He doesn't have leadership, instinct, or accuracy. Every one of those in and of themselves is a fatal flaw for a QB. Smith has managed to fail at all three. You could put him behind Montana for 5 years and still not see better results. Most notable is that leadership and instinct cannot be taught, and accuracy is damn hard to coach in someone who just doesn't have it.

I see this a lot in my psych wards. Its called denial........when you dont have answers, you just laugh it off.........


He's right. I think you guys overrate what Favre's tutelage did for Rodgers. If anything, what did Alex do the 2 years he sat on the bench and had an opportunity to learn from others ? Pretty much nothing....

wow, that is an incredible "counter-point" that I never thought. LOL, that dismisses every argument people have regarding Rodgers having the advantage for getting to ride the pine for 2 years and just observe. For that matter, Smith got to ride the pine with more real insight to NFL Quarterbacking than Rodgers did, giving Smith the advantage.

WOW! You are just wrong, my friend. At NO TIME that Smith has been on the 49ers has he had ANYTHING even close to the quality of coaching that Rodgers has had the entire time he has been at GB. The best thing he had was Trent Dilfer, a guy who wasn't good enough at it to even get a sniff from any other team. He can't get a coaching job from anyone, even now.

Time spent on the bench is of no value unless there is coaching available that can actually teach.

You're trying to compare Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the PLAYERS. What we should really look at is Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the MENTORS. In that respect, Dilfer probably had a lot more to offer to Smith than Favre did to Rodgers. Remember, Favre has always been a selfish in that he looks out for himself above all others. Thats why he's always willing to keep teams hanging til the final moments until he announces his return.

Alex Smith, despite not watching a HOF.........still has the chance to learn from a Superbowl Champion quarterback. No one says he had to learn the offensive system, but that was the time to learn the intricacies of the position eg reading defenses, pocket presence, instinct, anticipation.

He didnt.

Did you just try to say that watching Dilfer would be a bigger advantage than watching Favre?

LEARNING from Dilfer would be a bigger advantage, because Dilfer is more likely to offer pointers on the intricacies of the game, whereas Favre is not. From what I can remember from the Favre era in GB, announcers used to say that Favre wasnt a good mentor for Rodgers because he played unorthodox and took too many risks. Despite that, I think Dilfer would be a better person to talk to on the sidelines than Favre. Do you disagree ?

this is absolutely true. I think Steve learned zero behind Joe, for instance, because Joe didn't want Steve to succeed (or to succeed him).

Trent spent lots of time tutoring Smith, especially in the film room. I remember Smith saying "I would spend hundreds of hours reviewing film, but wasn't learning anything. Trent taught me how to learn from watching film, and what to look for." That is a great example. I'm hard pressed to believe that Favre, whose ego is bigger than Lambeau field, would do that with Rodgers.

Originally posted by Joecool:
No way would Smith have thesame career as Rodgers if Smith went to GB.

Yeah, I gotta say this is some sound reasoning as well. Rodgers seems to me to be more of a natural successor to the biggest gunslinger in NFL history. I don't think Smith is that guy. Only time I ever saw a flash of gunslinger is the end of the Eagles game this season.

Originally posted by Joecool:
No way would Smith have thesame career as Rodgers if Smith went to GB. Here are some very important reasons why:
1. Mentality: Smith was drafted because he was a yes man with a step aside personality. We did not draft Rodgers because he displayed a little more resistance. This directly points to how one carries out the plays as designed opposed to the other. This directly points to Smih never deviated from the play or improvising which we HAVE seen Rodgers do.

2. Situation: It was more difficult for Rodgers than you think. Farce was not open and volunteer his knowledge unless Rodgers came to him. This was reported. Alex had everyone willing to help him. Rodgers overcame a difficult situation where Farve refuse to let him have any chance whereas Smith was coddled into being prodded every chance. Rodgers also had two different OCs in two years but that didn't mess his mentality for the game up.

To say a player who showed a passive personality who performs everything to the script would play the same as a player who didn't display this personality when drafted is ridiculous. This is the reason why we see Rodgers make some crazy tight throws and Smih pass them up.

Now factor in other physical attributes that have nothing to do with experience and Smith fails.

It was considered that Smith ceiling was higher than Rodgers. ( see Jamarcus Russel vs. Brady Quinn)
Also Smith was considered to be be less cocky, more willing to do what he was told, in essence a coaches dream.

The famous Urban Meyer quote is true, the other part is that Alex needs a very creative offensive mind to guide him without interfernce form anybody. The only time he has such a thing was under Norv Turner.

he also was thorwn under the bus when he failed to grasp a diamterically different offence than he was used to ( Nolan´s quate that Smith has small hands).

nobody knows waht would have happend if Norv stayed or if cam Cameron was brought in.

He ws productive last year when we used more of a spread attack something he is good in.
When he is in the gun and the WR are spread out he plays good football.

Unfotunaltely the system that Singletray wnmats is totaly differne everything is tight inside runs, and routes that need time do develop.

I could see Alex being picket up by the colts at years end to be Peytons backup, their system is probably the closest thing to Urban Meyer´s spred, he also would be an immediate upgrade at the backup QB position.

I do belive that under Reid he would have a better chance of beeing a better Qb. He would not have been thrown under the bus, also he would not have to endure all those sacks and having no one to throw to.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by 49erRider:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by PopeyeJonesing:
OF COURSE he could have been a better QB. The same thing could be said for 80% of the QBs in the league and re: Reid's tutelage.

A pro-bowler? no way anybody could know that. I don't think so but maybe?

fwiw I think that all things being equal he's (or at one point could have been) a more skilled QB than Kevin Kolb.

One thing worth noting is that 9ers fans are the only people with even a passing interest in football who blamed Alex Smith for our offensive problems this year. Everyone from our coaches, to our other offensive players, to a ream of commentators saw less problems in Smith than in other things effecting the offense (getting plays in on time the first two games, crabs being responsibly for 4 ints, two rookie o-lineman playing like rookie o-lineman, teams calling out our plays before we ran them until Raye was fired, etc).

Not saying Alex was great, but nobody is as hard on him as 9ers "fans."

You are wrong. Go watch any 49er pregame show, and most commentators start from Alex Smith, then work their way to the team's other problems. Even before the season began, they had a Sunday night preseason game between Minn-SF, and both Al Michaels and Chris Collingsworth acknowledged that the team had a lot of potential to make noise in the NFC, but that would depend on the play of Alex Smith. They did the same during the Phil-SF game, where Collingsworth poibted out NUMEROUS occasions where Smith failed to make a play.

If anything, Niner fans have been more lenient with Smith than anyone else. Remember the pregame show on MNF before the NO-SF matchup ? Berman, Carter, Keyshawn, and Tom Jackson were laughing when discussing Alex Smith. How can you still be wondering after 6 years whether or not your QB is the future of the franchise (was the gist of their conversation) ?

You're leaving out the time that Collinsworth said that if the 49ers cut smith there would be 31 teams racing to sign him, and Michaels immediately agreed.

As a backup, sure. He'd make a pretty decent backup, but there are still teams with better 2nd-string QBs than Alex Smith, so I highly doubt 31 other teams would be lining up to sign him.

So I can better understand your perspective, would you please cite the teams that have #2 QBs that are better than Smith. I would like to read your analysis that leads you to that conclusion.

Why bother? You know you're going to disagree with anybody I bring up because you're one of the guys that continuously makes excuses for Alex Smith.

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by ZRF80:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Rodgers= exactly how you develop a QB and help your franchise.

Smith= exactly how you fvck up a QB and set back your franchise.

The answer to the OPs question lies in Green Bay. Rodgers went through the exact opposite of what Smith went through and the results show. Obviously Rodgers was more pro ready so it's not a total apples to apples comparison but it's safe to assume Alex would be FAR better off had him and Rodgers switched places.

You have a fallacy in your logic. You are assuming that because Rodgers was groomed behind a future HOF and with staffing/system continuity, that he was therefore successful - when you cannot prove that he would not have been very successful coming straight out of the chute like Ryan, Roethlisberger, Flacco, and many others.

Smith would have laid eggs no matter the circumstances. He doesn't have leadership, instinct, or accuracy. Every one of those in and of themselves is a fatal flaw for a QB. Smith has managed to fail at all three. You could put him behind Montana for 5 years and still not see better results. Most notable is that leadership and instinct cannot be taught, and accuracy is damn hard to coach in someone who just doesn't have it.

I see this a lot in my psych wards. Its called denial........when you dont have answers, you just laugh it off.........


He's right. I think you guys overrate what Favre's tutelage did for Rodgers. If anything, what did Alex do the 2 years he sat on the bench and had an opportunity to learn from others ? Pretty much nothing....

wow, that is an incredible "counter-point" that I never thought. LOL, that dismisses every argument people have regarding Rodgers having the advantage for getting to ride the pine for 2 years and just observe. For that matter, Smith got to ride the pine with more real insight to NFL Quarterbacking than Rodgers did, giving Smith the advantage.

WOW! You are just wrong, my friend. At NO TIME that Smith has been on the 49ers has he had ANYTHING even close to the quality of coaching that Rodgers has had the entire time he has been at GB. The best thing he had was Trent Dilfer, a guy who wasn't good enough at it to even get a sniff from any other team. He can't get a coaching job from anyone, even now.

Time spent on the bench is of no value unless there is coaching available that can actually teach.

You're trying to compare Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the PLAYERS. What we should really look at is Trent Dilfer and Brett Favre the MENTORS. In that respect, Dilfer probably had a lot more to offer to Smith than Favre did to Rodgers. Remember, Favre has always been a selfish in that he looks out for himself above all others. Thats why he's always willing to keep teams hanging til the final moments until he announces his return.

Alex Smith, despite not watching a HOF.........still has the chance to learn from a Superbowl Champion quarterback. No one says he had to learn the offensive system, but that was the time to learn the intricacies of the position eg reading defenses, pocket presence, instinct, anticipation.

He didnt.

Did you just try to say that watching Dilfer would be a bigger advantage than watching Favre?

LEARNING from Dilfer would be a bigger advantage, because Dilfer is more likely to offer pointers on the intricacies of the game, whereas Favre is not. From what I can remember from the Favre era in GB, announcers used to say that Favre wasnt a good mentor for Rodgers because he played unorthodox and took too many risks. Despite that, I think Dilfer would be a better person to talk to on the sidelines than Favre. Do you disagree ?

Well let me say i have to Disagree with your assessment. Let me tell you, sitting behind any HOF QB in being a rookie will have great benefits in my opinion. Maybe not too much phsically, but definitely mentally. When Dilfer won in my opinion he had the Sanchez esque team at the time. Good enough where if your Qb could manage the game, the rest will make sure they go above and beyond.

Sitting behind a Great QB, you learn how to take chances. In game time, you watch how the greats do it. With a great you have no doubts, you just watch learn and try to mentally see if you'd do the same thing. I dont think watching Favre, you'd worry about being timid. You wouldnt worry about throwing INT's because Favre almost leads the league, all time i think. Or i think he's top 5.

I mean BF has more SB's than Dilfer, and this quesiton about REid is kind of a big what could of been. But Z, like Smith or not, there's not a snowballs chance in hell, sitting behind a HOF QB makes no difference in the development of a rookie QB. Whether it be mental or physical in some way.

This team would have ruined even Peyton manning. Are coaching staff has sucked as with ownership!