Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:Originally posted by 24plus25er:Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:Originally posted by VA9erfan:
I can't wait for some here to get what they ask for.....A. Smith to be gone. Let's hear YOUR plan for next year if / after he is cut loose.
Honestly, do you really think it's going to be impossible to find someone who:
~can do better than 18-30 as a starter?
~has a career passer rating of 71?
~has a career completion % of 56.9?
~has thrown 52 picks to 49 TDs?
~has 85 turnovers in 51 games played
~has never won more than 7 games in a season as a starter?
Is this all Alex's fault? Of course not; he's had to deal with things that few rookie/young QBs have had to...and I actually like Alex as a person and as a man. But there comes a point where Smith fans have to look at the player and see him for what he's done. And what he's done is not pretty.
Findng someone to do better than Smith will not be as difficult as you (and many others) make it seem. It's time to move on (both for him, and for the team).
All those numbers don't mean jack, because if you put Aaron Rodgers in the same position as Alex his numbers would be just as bad. Time has proven that you must surround QB with the weapons to win. We have had horrible drafts over the past 10 years (outside of last year), and put Alex amongst that mediorce mess and you get mediorce play. Alex deserves another year or two with Mike Johnson at OC before we pull the trigger. There is no possible way we can put together any clear cut combo of QB and OC that is hands down better.
This is the most criminal, the worst, of all the Alexcuses. Your logic basically goes like this... give a QB good weapons and he'll play well... give him nothing and he'll be nothing...
Where it all breaks down is when you realise that according to your logic QB play is dictated entirely by the supporting cast. QBs are basically all the same.. there's no such thing as a good QB or bad QB there are only good teams and bad teams; and the bad teams have failed to adequately surround their QB with talent. Manning, Delhomme, Fitzpatrick, Brady, it's all the same. It's based on the premise of different players under different circumstances would play differently - which (while true) completely ignores the fact that the QBs are indeed different themselves, that there are massive skill level differences between them, and these gaps in skill play a significant role in who wins and loses each Sunday in the NFL.
To sit there and suggest that entire careers worth of work can be disregarded as "meaning jack", tossed entirely out the window, because of your assumption (completely irreprovable by the way, short of building a time machine and calling out Aaron Rodgers name first in the draft in '05) is downright silly. In the effort to make a point, you have only exposed yourself as missing the most important pieces of this puzzle.
Let me put it this way. Consider trading Smith straight up for Aaron Rodgers. Either you would do this or you woudn't. If you would you are admitting Rodgers is a superior QB, debunking your argument. If you wouldn't, then you are exposing your own stubborn foolishness.
Rodgers has no online, no running game... now he's out with a concussion. Packers chances to make the playoffs are about the same as ours. Actually ours are better at this point.
Peyton loses several starters and has a down year...odds of making the playoffs same as ours.
YOU HAVE TO PUT QUALITY PLAYERS AROUND YOUR QB... point blank period. You can't put a v4 engine in a f150 and expect it to run.
