Box score: alex 9/15 and it sounded like a repeat of last yr. Then I saw the game on NFL..

fake and gay

Originally posted by BobS:
Wow, starters vs starters we led the RAIDERS 3-0 at halftime of a preseason game and that is enough to predict this is going to be the best team we have seen in a long time? Three elite running backs?

.

Interesting Read: One fans response to Lowell Cohn giving Alex Smith a "D-" for his performance.

There are three main problems I have with this column.

First of all, after checking the TV replay multiple times, I strongly dispute the notion that Smith stared at Davis the whole way. If anything, he threw the pick because he didn't stare at him enough. If you look at this clip, particularly the second half of it with the end zone view, you'll clearly see that Smith kept his eyes down the middle of the field to look off the safeties. Only at the last instant did he look at Davis before releasing the ball, assuming with the safeties out of the play that Davis would be all alone. If he stared at him the whole way, as Cohn suggests, he would've seen the ultra-rare sight of a defensive end, in this case Matt Shaughnessy, dropping 15 yards down the field and toward the sidelines to take the out route away. Was it a poor read from Smith? Absolutely. But suggesting that Smith made the rookie mistake of staring down a receiver the whole way is at best lazy writing and at worst agenda-driven writing, a case of seeing what you want to see instead of what actually transpired.

Secondly, Cohn brings up Smith's final rating - 61.7 - to draw his "D-" conclusion. It's cute, but again either thoughtless or willfully misleading. Smith had all of 13 pass attempts and three of his five incompletions were flat out drops of passes he put right on the receivers' hands.

Thirdly and most important of all, Cohn ignores the fact that Smith had virtually no chance to boost his stats with touchdown passes because of the six goal-to-go plays the team ran on their first and third drives, Jim Harbaugh, cognizant of not wanting to reveal any of his good plays in the preseason, called simple runs up the gut. The one pass attempt Smith had, it was a play-action with one receiver option, Joshua Morgan. Smith felt Morgan was covered, so he threw the ball away.

Now, lord knows Smith has deserved plenty of criticism for his play over the years. But I think we can agree that one of his strengths has been as a red zone passer. He's very effective there. He either throws touchdowns or the team kicks field goals. He doesn't turn the ball over in those situations. He led the league in passer rating last season -- something like 118, I think -- and had nine touchdowns and no picks in red zone situations. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he might have produced at least one touchdown there in a normal circumstance if given the opportunity.

Cohn punishes Smith in his column without ever clarifying that he had but one goal-to-go pass attempt and never explains how a different non-Smith quarterback could've produced multiple touchdowns on drives one and three where Smith did not. He all but blames the botched up field goal on Smith.

In my opinion, there are two main facets of quarterback play: Making the right decision and making an accurate throw. I contend that on Smith's 13 attempts he executed 25 out of 26 possible times. He made the right decision 12 of 13 plays, with the only obvious exception being the interception, and he made an accurate throw all 13 of his plays. Even on the pick, if Shaughnessy wasn't there, the ball was on a direct trajectory to Davis. It was a bad decision, but not an inaccurate pass.

I gave Smith a "B" for the game, knocking him down a full letter grade for the interception. Otherwise it was very hard to find any fault with him. He read the Raiders defense, he stood tall against their blitzes, and he made the right decision and the accurate throw time and again. To me, that's progress, as much as we can assign progress to a preaseason game against the Raiders. I don't blame him for not putting more points on the board because his hands were tied by the coach (and wisely so, considering the circumstance).

I suspect Cohn in his heart of hearts probably thinks Smith had a "B" game as well. However he is a columnist, and the job of the columnist is to be interesting and provocative. If you want an honest assessment of how so-and-so played, look to the beat writers, whose jobs are to be objective. Columnists look for angles, even ones they don't necessarily believe.I think Cohn didn't write that Smith had a "B" game because he doesn't think that is interesting enough to warrant a column. It wouldn't have gotten as much reader reaction, positive or negative, as writing that he stunk.

Well you know what? People have written "Alex Smith stinks" columns since 2005. No one in their right mind has any expectations of him. Everyone assumes he'll always stink. So to my way of thinking, writing "Alex Smith stunk" IS the boring column.

You want to be original? You want to be provocative? Explain to your writers that while you saw good things A, B, and C, that it doesn't mean squat because you still saw X, Y, and Z. That as long as X, Y, and Z exist Smith will always let people down. Make it clear that while Smith played well in this game, you still think he'll be poor when it matters. At least then you're stating a critical opinion, which is your aim, but still being honest about the game you watched in the context of its own vacuum.

Otherwise, why even go to the game? Seriously, Cohn could've written this column by looking at the box score, and if I didn't personally see him in the press box, I would've assumed that's just what he did.

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:

Originally posted by BobS:

Wow, starters vs starters we led the RAIDERS 3-0 at halftime of a preseason game and that is enough to predict this is going to be the best team we have seen in a long time? Three elite running backs?

.

It was more they way we moved the ball and how we played as a team, not so much the score. Also coaching, even though it was vanilla looked much better than what I've seen in years. And we always have elite pre season rbs no big deal. Lol

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Interesting Read: One fans response to Lowell Cohn giving Alex Smith a "D-" for his performance.

There are three main problems I have with this column.

First of all, after checking the TV replay multiple times, I strongly dispute the notion that Smith stared at Davis the whole way. If anything, he threw the pick because he didn't stare at him enough. If you look at this clip, particularly the second half of it with the end zone view, you'll clearly see that Smith kept his eyes down the middle of the field to look off the safeties. Only at the last instant did he look at Davis before releasing the ball, assuming with the safeties out of the play that Davis would be all alone. If he stared at him the whole way, as Cohn suggests, he would've seen the ultra-rare sight of a defensive end, in this case Matt Shaughnessy, dropping 15 yards down the field and toward the sidelines to take the out route away. Was it a poor read from Smith? Absolutely. But suggesting that Smith made the rookie mistake of staring down a receiver the whole way is at best lazy writing and at worst agenda-driven writing, a case of seeing what you want to see instead of what actually transpired.

Secondly, Cohn brings up Smith's final rating - 61.7 - to draw his "D-" conclusion. It's cute, but again either thoughtless or willfully misleading. Smith had all of 13 pass attempts and three of his five incompletions were flat out drops of passes he put right on the receivers' hands.

Thirdly and most important of all, Cohn ignores the fact that Smith had virtually no chance to boost his stats with touchdown passes because of the six goal-to-go plays the team ran on their first and third drives, Jim Harbaugh, cognizant of not wanting to reveal any of his good plays in the preseason, called simple runs up the gut. The one pass attempt Smith had, it was a play-action with one receiver option, Joshua Morgan. Smith felt Morgan was covered, so he threw the ball away.

Now, lord knows Smith has deserved plenty of criticism for his play over the years. But I think we can agree that one of his strengths has been as a red zone passer. He's very effective there. He either throws touchdowns or the team kicks field goals. He doesn't turn the ball over in those situations. He led the league in passer rating last season -- something like 118, I think -- and had nine touchdowns and no picks in red zone situations. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he might have produced at least one touchdown there in a normal circumstance if given the opportunity.

Cohn punishes Smith in his column without ever clarifying that he had but one goal-to-go pass attempt and never explains how a different non-Smith quarterback could've produced multiple touchdowns on drives one and three where Smith did not. He all but blames the botched up field goal on Smith.

In my opinion, there are two main facets of quarterback play: Making the right decision and making an accurate throw. I contend that on Smith's 13 attempts he executed 25 out of 26 possible times. He made the right decision 12 of 13 plays, with the only obvious exception being the interception, and he made an accurate throw all 13 of his plays. Even on the pick, if Shaughnessy wasn't there, the ball was on a direct trajectory to Davis. It was a bad decision, but not an inaccurate pass.

I gave Smith a "B" for the game, knocking him down a full letter grade for the interception. Otherwise it was very hard to find any fault with him. He read the Raiders defense, he stood tall against their blitzes, and he made the right decision and the accurate throw time and again. To me, that's progress, as much as we can assign progress to a preaseason game against the Raiders. I don't blame him for not putting more points on the board because his hands were tied by the coach (and wisely so, considering the circumstance).

I suspect Cohn in his heart of hearts probably thinks Smith had a "B" game as well. However he is a columnist, and the job of the columnist is to be interesting and provocative. If you want an honest assessment of how so-and-so played, look to the beat writers, whose jobs are to be objective. Columnists look for angles, even ones they don't necessarily believe.I think Cohn didn't write that Smith had a "B" game because he doesn't think that is interesting enough to warrant a column. It wouldn't have gotten as much reader reaction, positive or negative, as writing that he stunk.

Well you know what? People have written "Alex Smith stinks" columns since 2005. No one in their right mind has any expectations of him. Everyone assumes he'll always stink. So to my way of thinking, writing "Alex Smith stunk" IS the boring column.

You want to be original? You want to be provocative? Explain to your writers that while you saw good things A, B, and C, that it doesn't mean squat because you still saw X, Y, and Z. That as long as X, Y, and Z exist Smith will always let people down. Make it clear that while Smith played well in this game, you still think he'll be poor when it matters. At least then you're stating a critical opinion, which is your aim, but still being honest about the game you watched in the context of its own vacuum.

Otherwise, why even go to the game? Seriously, Cohn could've written this column by looking at the box score, and if I didn't personally see him in the press box, I would've assumed that's just what he did.

Good read, thanks for posting.

Originally posted by 49erDynasty:
In regards to the media portrayal versus actual developments:
The Bay Area media has in many cases been very critical of our quarterbacks. Initially, Montana was underrated until he won his 3rd and then 4th championship, tying Terry Bradshaw for the highest all time. Steve Young had it the worst and in his case the fans were also extremely critical. On top of that, Eddie Debartolo was not an owner that would accept anything less than championships for long. In 1992 Steve Young had a fantastic statistical year but may have been a miserable failure at winning fan approval. In the 1992 NFC Championship game, as Joe watched from the 49er sidelines, Steve Young lost to the Cowboys at home in Candlestick Park. The 49ers needing a come from behind victory stuck with Steve through the game while the legend that fans had been accustomed to seeing pull off such victories was on the bench. The move clearly alienated the fan base and Steve Young was simply not the popular choice, if he was any choice at all. Many 49er fans did not trust or believe in him. Part of the reason for this was that in the late 80's and onwards, Steve was perceived as an unworthy competitor to Joe. He was not perceived as being cool under pressure and people feared that he was ultimately not a winning quarterback. Joe was traded the subsequent year to cement Steve's position as the #1 quarterback amidst great criticism from fans and writers. That year Steve went on to have another great statistical year but lost to the Cowboys again. For many fans, that was the last straw. The voices that wanted Steve traded instead of Joe became louder. By many, he was declared a loser while Joe, the perennial winner and legend, was perceived to be supplanted by the the 2nd string failure. In 1994, despite a completely revamped defense, Steve Young could not defeat Joe Montana and the Chiefs. Many 49er fans openly cheered for Joe to defeat Steve and spite the 49er franchise for selecting a "loser" over a proven winner. The 49ers were also blown out by the inferior Eagles. But then things eventually turned around to the point where Steve overcame his demons to lead SF over the Cowboys and to a Super Bowl victory.

The lesson from that aspect of history may be that some players can eventually rise to occasion and become winners with improvements to other areas of the team. It may take a better coaching staff like when Steve had Mike Shannahan or a better defense when they acquired Deion Sanders amongst other greats, but with certain improvements perceptions can change. Despite having Rice, Taylor, Jones, Watters, Sapolu, Barton and others forming the greatest offensive arsenal, Steve could not defeat the Cowboys until he had a dangerous defense with one of the greatest secondaries in history. In Alex Smith's case, he does not have even one proven league leading player, let alone a former Super Bowl MVP and now GOAT, like Jerry. The coaching staff was not guided by great coaches like George Seifert, Mike Shannahan, Ray Rhodes, Bobb McKittrick and others. With a better coaching staff, continuous infusion of new talent and upgrades across the board, there is no telling what Alex Smith's ceiling can be. Many wrote off Steve Young after years of failure. There are still some that will say that Joe could have reached the 5th championship sooner and there was no true purpose to retaining Steve. Then again, success has shown to come in different packages with an ever unique array of story lines. Not every player will lead the drive culminating with "The Catch" and then go on to four Super Bowl Championships. Some, like Steve Young will face much failure despite some of the greatest casts of players and coaches supporting him, to eventually become a champion. Others may have neither the great coaches nor the all world players and face adversity. As the coaches and players evolve to a higher level of performance, so may that quarterback and team. Alex Smith's refined performance, the new coaching staff, and the coming roster improvements may suggest that such a change is more likely than it has been in the last several years.

Steve Young was criticized for not winning super bowls. He was the league MVP, put up historically accurate numbers, and athletically was as gifted as any QB this side of Mike Vick. He showed flashes of being a pro bowl QB since coming into the league (the run against the Vikings is legendary, but he also led the 49ers to some big wins in 1988), but yes, it took him a number of years before he developed into a HOF player.

Alex Smith is criticized for not winning regular season games. He lacks accuracy, a big arm, and a feel for the game. He has shown flashes of being an average QB since coming into the league but aside from the Seattle game 4 years ago I can't recall ever watching him and thinking that he possesses the talent to be a pro bowl player.

Originally posted by midrdan:
Steve Young was criticized for not winning super bowls. He was the league MVP, put up historically accurate numbers, and athletically was as gifted as any QB this side of Mike Vick. He showed flashes of being a pro bowl QB since coming into the league (the run against the Vikings is legendary, but he also led the 49ers to some big wins in 1988), but yes, it took him a number of years before he developed into a HOF player.

Alex Smith is criticized for not winning regular season and PRESEASON games. He lacks accuracy, a big arm, and a feel for the game. He has shown flashes of being an average QB since coming into the league but aside from the Seattle game 4 years ago I can't recall ever watching him and thinking that he possesses the talent to be a pro bowl player.

Fixed

Originally posted by midrdan:

Steve Young was criticized for not winning super bowls. He was the league MVP, put up historically accurate numbers, and athletically was as gifted as any QB this side of Mike Vick. He showed flashes of being a pro bowl QB since coming into the league (the run against the Vikings is legendary, but he also led the 49ers to some big wins in 1988), but yes, it took him a number of years before he developed into a HOF player.

Alex Smith is criticized for not winning regular season games. He lacks accuracy, a big arm, and a feel for the game. He has shown flashes of being an average QB since coming into the league but aside from the Seattle game 4 years ago I can't recall ever watching him and thinking that he possesses the talent to be a pro bowl player.

He has shown flashes of being a very good quarterback on many occasions, the problem is consistency. Last years Saints and Eagles games had some serious drives where Smith was great, the throw he made to Gore in the back of the end zone against the Jags was a thing of beauty. He has the tools, maybe it was what I have been thinking, he just needed the right kind of coach, one that puts his players in a position to succeed.

Originally posted by Memphis9er:
He has shown flashes of being a very good quarterback on many occasions, the problem is consistency. Last years Saints and Eagles games had some serious drives where Smith was great, the throw he made to Gore in the back of the end zone against the Jags was a thing of beauty. He has the tools, maybe it was what I have been thinking, he just needed the right kind of coach, one that puts his players in a position to succeed.

This, I think he will show more flashes than we have ever seen this year.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Alex actually was 3/6 initially and all three incompletes were right on the money. The fourth incomp. was a well advised throw away. I make that 9/15 really a 13/15, and alex looked good in doing it. Two things happened: first, the OL which stunk against the Saints, played like a real OL and both blocked for alex and also our elite 3 RBs. Poti got out on a pulling play and double dipped two defenders. Staley looked solid, wragge looked like someone i hadn't seen play before, and same for the few other remaining Ols from last yr. Better yet, it looks like we may have 3 , maybe 4 legit OL starters on the bench. Yeah, it is preseason, but the young dudes on OL played like something we haven't seen on the OL in yrs.

Big difference between this yr and last 8 yrs, was that if there was a weakness on OL, JH coached away from it...something i got hacked off at BM and noln, erWreckson et al...when they didn't use that simplest of all tactics. Guys, this team blocked like a pro team(unheard of last 8 yrs), the receivers made some terrific catches, ran good routes, and it didn't hurt to have Braylon there to get attn off other guys. His one hander was a beaut.

As for D, we still need help on CBs, but they will come around, or JH will coach around them too. Overall, this was the one best game this team has played in the last 10 yrs and that is from two things: a) we finally got a coach who is an OC, a DC, and a HC...plus he is smart, and knows his business...something BM, noln, nor erickson never did. b) baalke and JH really have an eye for talent, and took advantage of all the early cuts, the many UDFAs, and the guys who were cut on salary basis. I get the feeling that we finally got a tremendous front office and an even better HC/OC. Granted this is all just one game and it is the preseason. But anybody who saw that game and wasn't excited at OL, QB,RB, DL( aubrayo is another one who is better off gone), WR, LB...well they just weren't paying attn. The fact that we have so many OLs in the mix is just unbelievable. JH, Baalke maybe paraghe, finally figured out the Bellicheat philosophy: don't keep players too long, and if somebody doesn't cut it , cut him. Also, the NE philosophy of bringing in lots of new guys each yr is very obvious in this draft which means also getting rid of dead wood...baas, aubray, heitmann. With the salary cap, a team has to draft well, really well , and bring lots of new guys on board each yr. We did that this yr and man does it ever show. As for alex, well, he got his OC/HC, and Sat it looked like the guy we actually drafted out of college. Unbelieveable, but he could finally be coming into his own with a...wait for it...a great HC who is also a qB coach and OC. Bring 2011 on.

we were missing our number 1 cb, and probably our 2....

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
Alex actually was 3/6 initially and all three incompletes were right on the money. The fourth incomp. was a well advised throw away. I make that 9/15 really a 13/15, and alex looked good in doing it. Two things happened: first, the OL which stunk against the Saints, played like a real OL and both blocked for alex and also our elite 3 RBs. Poti got out on a pulling play and double dipped two defenders. Staley looked solid, wragge looked like someone i hadn't seen play before, and same for the few other remaining Ols from last yr. Better yet, it looks like we may have 3 , maybe 4 legit OL starters on the bench. Yeah, it is preseason, but the young dudes on OL played like something we haven't seen on the OL in yrs.

Big difference between this yr and last 8 yrs, was that if there was a weakness on OL, JH coached away from it...something i got hacked off at BM and noln, erWreckson et al...when they didn't use that simplest of all tactics. Guys, this team blocked like a pro team(unheard of last 8 yrs), the receivers made some terrific catches, ran good routes, and it didn't hurt to have Braylon there to get attn off other guys. His one hander was a beaut.

As for D, we still need help on CBs, but they will come around, or JH will coach around them too. Overall, this was the one best game this team has played in the last 10 yrs and that is from two things: a) we finally got a coach who is an OC, a DC, and a HC...plus he is smart, and knows his business...something BM, noln, nor erickson never did. b) baalke and JH really have an eye for talent, and took advantage of all the early cuts, the many UDFAs, and the guys who were cut on salary basis. I get the feeling that we finally got a tremendous front office and an even better HC/OC. Granted this is all just one game and it is the preseason. But anybody who saw that game and wasn't excited at OL, QB,RB, DL( aubrayo is another one who is better off gone), WR, LB...well they just weren't paying attn. The fact that we have so many OLs in the mix is just unbelievable. JH, Baalke maybe paraghe, finally figured out the Bellicheat philosophy: don't keep players too long, and if somebody doesn't cut it , cut him. Also, the NE philosophy of bringing in lots of new guys each yr is very obvious in this draft which means also getting rid of dead wood...baas, aubray, heitmann. With the salary cap, a team has to draft well, really well , and bring lots of new guys on board each yr. We did that this yr and man does it ever show. As for alex, well, he got his OC/HC, and Sat it looked like the guy we actually drafted out of college. Unbelieveable, but he could finally be coming into his own with a...wait for it...a great HC who is also a qB coach and OC. Bring 2011 on.

we were missing our number 1 cb, and probably our 2....

Originally posted by backontop:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:
Interesting Read: One fans response to Lowell Cohn giving Alex Smith a "D-" for his performance.

There are three main problems I have with this column.

First of all, after checking the TV replay multiple times, I strongly dispute the notion that Smith stared at Davis the whole way. If anything, he threw the pick because he didn't stare at him enough. If you look at this clip, particularly the second half of it with the end zone view, you'll clearly see that Smith kept his eyes down the middle of the field to look off the safeties. Only at the last instant did he look at Davis before releasing the ball, assuming with the safeties out of the play that Davis would be all alone. If he stared at him the whole way, as Cohn suggests, he would've seen the ultra-rare sight of a defensive end, in this case Matt Shaughnessy, dropping 15 yards down the field and toward the sidelines to take the out route away. Was it a poor read from Smith? Absolutely. But suggesting that Smith made the rookie mistake of staring down a receiver the whole way is at best lazy writing and at worst agenda-driven writing, a case of seeing what you want to see instead of what actually transpired.

Secondly, Cohn brings up Smith's final rating - 61.7 - to draw his "D-" conclusion. It's cute, but again either thoughtless or willfully misleading. Smith had all of 13 pass attempts and three of his five incompletions were flat out drops of passes he put right on the receivers' hands.

Thirdly and most important of all, Cohn ignores the fact that Smith had virtually no chance to boost his stats with touchdown passes because of the six goal-to-go plays the team ran on their first and third drives, Jim Harbaugh, cognizant of not wanting to reveal any of his good plays in the preseason, called simple runs up the gut. The one pass attempt Smith had, it was a play-action with one receiver option, Joshua Morgan. Smith felt Morgan was covered, so he threw the ball away.

Now, lord knows Smith has deserved plenty of criticism for his play over the years. But I think we can agree that one of his strengths has been as a red zone passer. He's very effective there. He either throws touchdowns or the team kicks field goals. He doesn't turn the ball over in those situations. He led the league in passer rating last season -- something like 118, I think -- and had nine touchdowns and no picks in red zone situations. I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he might have produced at least one touchdown there in a normal circumstance if given the opportunity.

Cohn punishes Smith in his column without ever clarifying that he had but one goal-to-go pass attempt and never explains how a different non-Smith quarterback could've produced multiple touchdowns on drives one and three where Smith did not. He all but blames the botched up field goal on Smith.

In my opinion, there are two main facets of quarterback play: Making the right decision and making an accurate throw. I contend that on Smith's 13 attempts he executed 25 out of 26 possible times. He made the right decision 12 of 13 plays, with the only obvious exception being the interception, and he made an accurate throw all 13 of his plays. Even on the pick, if Shaughnessy wasn't there, the ball was on a direct trajectory to Davis. It was a bad decision, but not an inaccurate pass.

I gave Smith a "B" for the game, knocking him down a full letter grade for the interception. Otherwise it was very hard to find any fault with him. He read the Raiders defense, he stood tall against their blitzes, and he made the right decision and the accurate throw time and again. To me, that's progress, as much as we can assign progress to a preaseason game against the Raiders. I don't blame him for not putting more points on the board because his hands were tied by the coach (and wisely so, considering the circumstance).

I suspect Cohn in his heart of hearts probably thinks Smith had a "B" game as well. However he is a columnist, and the job of the columnist is to be interesting and provocative. If you want an honest assessment of how so-and-so played, look to the beat writers, whose jobs are to be objective. Columnists look for angles, even ones they don't necessarily believe.I think Cohn didn't write that Smith had a "B" game because he doesn't think that is interesting enough to warrant a column. It wouldn't have gotten as much reader reaction, positive or negative, as writing that he stunk.

Well you know what? People have written "Alex Smith stinks" columns since 2005. No one in their right mind has any expectations of him. Everyone assumes he'll always stink. So to my way of thinking, writing "Alex Smith stunk" IS the boring column.

You want to be original? You want to be provocative? Explain to your writers that while you saw good things A, B, and C, that it doesn't mean squat because you still saw X, Y, and Z. That as long as X, Y, and Z exist Smith will always let people down. Make it clear that while Smith played well in this game, you still think he'll be poor when it matters. At least then you're stating a critical opinion, which is your aim, but still being honest about the game you watched in the context of its own vacuum.

Otherwise, why even go to the game? Seriously, Cohn could've written this column by looking at the box score, and if I didn't personally see him in the press box, I would've assumed that's just what he did.

Good read, thanks for posting.

This. This kid owned Cohn.

Originally posted by midrdan:

Originally posted by 49erDynasty:
In regards to the media portrayal versus actual developments:
The Bay Area media has in many cases been very critical of our quarterbacks. Initially, Montana was underrated until he won his 3rd and then 4th championship, tying Terry Bradshaw for the highest all time. Steve Young had it the worst and in his case the fans were also extremely critical. On top of that, Eddie Debartolo was not an owner that would accept anything less than championships for long. In 1992 Steve Young had a fantastic statistical year but may have been a miserable failure at winning fan approval. In the 1992 NFC Championship game, as Joe watched from the 49er sidelines, Steve Young lost to the Cowboys at home in Candlestick Park. The 49ers needing a come from behind victory stuck with Steve through the game while the legend that fans had been accustomed to seeing pull off such victories was on the bench. The move clearly alienated the fan base and Steve Young was simply not the popular choice, if he was any choice at all. Many 49er fans did not trust or believe in him. Part of the reason for this was that in the late 80's and onwards, Steve was perceived as an unworthy competitor to Joe. He was not perceived as being cool under pressure and people feared that he was ultimately not a winning quarterback. Joe was traded the subsequent year to cement Steve's position as the #1 quarterback amidst great criticism from fans and writers. That year Steve went on to have another great statistical year but lost to the Cowboys again. For many fans, that was the last straw. The voices that wanted Steve traded instead of Joe became louder. By many, he was declared a loser while Joe, the perennial winner and legend, was perceived to be supplanted by the the 2nd string failure. In 1994, despite a completely revamped defense, Steve Young could not defeat Joe Montana and the Chiefs. Many 49er fans openly cheered for Joe to defeat Steve and spite the 49er franchise for selecting a "loser" over a proven winner. The 49ers were also blown out by the inferior Eagles. But then things eventually turned around to the point where Steve overcame his demons to lead SF over the Cowboys and to a Super Bowl victory.

The lesson from that aspect of history may be that some players can eventually rise to occasion and become winners with improvements to other areas of the team. It may take a better coaching staff like when Steve had Mike Shannahan or a better defense when they acquired Deion Sanders amongst other greats, but with certain improvements perceptions can change. Despite having Rice, Taylor, Jones, Watters, Sapolu, Barton and others forming the greatest offensive arsenal, Steve could not defeat the Cowboys until he had a dangerous defense with one of the greatest secondaries in history. In Alex Smith's case, he does not have even one proven league leading player, let alone a former Super Bowl MVP and now GOAT, like Jerry. The coaching staff was not guided by great coaches like George Seifert, Mike Shannahan, Ray Rhodes, Bobb McKittrick and others. With a better coaching staff, continuous infusion of new talent and upgrades across the board, there is no telling what Alex Smith's ceiling can be. Many wrote off Steve Young after years of failure. There are still some that will say that Joe could have reached the 5th championship sooner and there was no true purpose to retaining Steve. Then again, success has shown to come in different packages with an ever unique array of story lines. Not every player will lead the drive culminating with "The Catch" and then go on to four Super Bowl Championships. Some, like Steve Young will face much failure despite some of the greatest casts of players and coaches supporting him, to eventually become a champion. Others may have neither the great coaches nor the all world players and face adversity. As the coaches and players evolve to a higher level of performance, so may that quarterback and team. Alex Smith's refined performance, the new coaching staff, and the coming roster improvements may suggest that such a change is more likely than it has been in the last several years.

Steve Young was criticized for not winning super bowls. He was the league MVP, put up historically accurate numbers, and athletically was as gifted as any QB this side of Mike Vick. He showed flashes of being a pro bowl QB since coming into the league (the run against the Vikings is legendary, but he also led the 49ers to some big wins in 1988), but yes, it took him a number of years before he developed into a HOF player.

Alex Smith is criticized for not winning regular season games. He lacks accuracy, a big arm, and a feel for the game. He has shown flashes of being an average QB since coming into the league but aside from the Seattle game 4 years ago I can't recall ever watching him and thinking that he possesses the talent to be a pro bowl player.

Ask Tampa Bay if Steve Young showed any flashes of being a good QB in regular season games during his stint there. It took coaching, a scheme, and time on the bench watching a HOF QB for him to accomplish all those feats you mentioned.

Originally posted by gamechanger:
Ask Tampa Bay if Steve Young showed any flashes of being a good QB in regular season games during his stint there. It took coaching, a scheme, and time on the bench watching a HOF QB for him to accomplish all those feats you mentioned.

People seem to forget this. They think that all great players are born, never made. Steve Young is the first to admit that he wasn't anything near the player he ended up being when he first started out in tampa.

I hate that this fan community has gotten all cute and invented the whole "alexcuses" moniker, because it really undervalues a lot of the s**t that Ales has had to go through during his time here. I honestly can't think of any player who has had to persevere through more in his first 7 years in the league than Alex has. On some level, I get it. Results are what matter at the end of the day. It just sucks that people aren't able to maintain both that perspective and a healthy appreciation of the fact that he has had SO MUCH sh*t to put up with. Instead we always see it denigrate into a bunch of insults and heavy-handed bias that brings down the collective intelligence of this community and honestly hurts my pride as a 49ers fan. I can't believe we attack our own so much.

Originally posted by gamechanger:
Ask Tampa Bay if Steve Young showed any flashes of being a good QB in regular season games during his stint there. It took coaching, a scheme, and time on the bench watching a HOF QB for him to accomplish all those feats you mentioned.

I love this post.