ESPN Ranking NFL starting quarterbacks (Alex Smith #28)

Originally posted by Shaj:
all franchises make bad decisions. Philadelphia just made one of their offensive coaches the head defensive coach for their team, which every zoner here would use as an excuse if that was our team, but they will still experience success, most of all because their QB is Michael Vick. You just don't notice or have reason to discuss bad decisions when you have a very, very good QB on the team who rises above everything and gives you reason to focus on the good. Bradford just got a new OC and new system, and they were also the worst team in the league 2 years ago, and he came from a non-pro style offense in college, but you won't see Rams fans making excuses because the kid just flat out plays. Greatness transcends excuses. Ineptitude begs for excuses.

You are the one coming up with excuses to dump on one player for the failure of a team. Comparing the 9ers decsion making over the past EIGHT YEARS with what you consider to be a mishire of a coach on a team that just signed tons of great free agents is really mind boggling! Have the Eagles had the same HC/OC for many years? Yes, and I wonder if that helps the QB and offense in general? No, that would just be an excuse. There is no reason for the success of the team...it's all the QB just doing it on his own. No plays being sent in, no OLine, no receivers, just a great QB all by himself.

Think about the 9ers inability to build an offensive line for an example. The 9ers have jumped and overpaid for FAs then sat and watched them under acheive due to injury or age. Or by putting them next to other linemen who were incompetent. They have failed to develop the talent they have had and are only now bringing in top level talent for the line.

Now the 9ers have one of the youngest groups of linemen in the NFL. If they cut Wragge they will have only Goodwin and Snyder with reasonable experience for a lineman. But, Harbaugh is a crafty guy and he will try to use deception, movement and play variety to give the line an edge.

If Bradford succeeds good for him. I wish him well. That does not mean he should be used as a foil to berate Smith. Their experience is very different and you can't change that just by holding your breath and stamping your foot (metaphorically). Smith will either play well this year or he won't. At the end of the year we can hope the team is much improved...or we can hope our players fail.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:


Bad coaching + good talent can also = failure. See Dennis Erickson. In 2003, he had a pro-bowl QB and WR with Garcia and Owens. Had Garrison Hearst. Had on OL with a healthy Eric Heitmann, Jeremy Newberry, Ron Stone and Scott Gragg. Team went 7-9.

OMG I would kill to have that line right now. What a perfect example of what a difference coaching makes. This is what separates the fans who truly have been following this team vs the fans who are casual 9er fans that catch the ESPN highlights. Nice man.

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Bad coaching + good talent can also = failure. See Dennis Erickson. In 2003, he had a pro-bowl QB and WR with Garcia and Owens. Had Garrison Hearst. Had on OL with a healthy Eric Heitmann, Jeremy Newberry, Ron Stone and Scott Gragg. Team went 7-9.

OMG I would kill to have that line right now. What a perfect example of what a difference coaching makes. This is what separates the fans who truly have been following this team vs the fans who are casual 9er fans that catch the ESPN highlights. Nice man.

I mean, seriously. When you have bad coaching, teams fail. When you have inferior talent, teams fail. Alex -- although not a good player himself -- was surrounded by BOTH. How the FRICK is he supposed to succeed with that?

As mediocre as Alex played, this team was 1 and 2 games out of the playoffs each of the past two seasons. If Alex produced the same amount he has been, and our defense is even slightly better... with better coaching this is a playoff team.

Last year's playoff miss can sure as heck be blamed a bunch of other players than Alex. 1 more win. That's all we needed. A lot of what if's..

What if Philip Adams hadn't fumbled the punt against the Saints? What if Baas hadn't snapped the ball for a safety?
What if Clements hadn't fumbled the interception against Atlanta?
What if Singletary had started Alex against St. Louis?
What if the line hadn't let a free rusher pancake Alex in the Panthers game? And what if Carr didn't throw the game away after that?

4 games most will argue we should have won. You could argue coaching had its hand in 3 of those losses.

1) Telling Clements to get down and/or protect the ball.
2) Seeing Smith's track record against the Rams, and considering the fact that he DESTROYED Seattle a week prior. But because Smith had a tough time and threw ONE interception against the NFL's #1 Defense in San Diego, he started Troy.
3) Carr clearly was not ready to play. Why even put him out there?

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Shaj:
all franchises make bad decisions. Philadelphia just made one of their offensive coaches the head defensive coach for their team, which every zoner here would use as an excuse if that was our team, but they will still experience success, most of all because their QB is Michael Vick. You just don't notice or have reason to discuss bad decisions when you have a very, very good QB on the team who rises above everything and gives you reason to focus on the good. Bradford just got a new OC and new system, and they were also the worst team in the league 2 years ago, and he came from a non-pro style offense in college, but you won't see Rams fans making excuses because the kid just flat out plays. Greatness transcends excuses. Ineptitude begs for excuses.

You are the one coming up with excuses to dump on one player for the failure of a team. Comparing the 9ers decsion making over the past EIGHT YEARS with what you consider to be a mishire of a coach on a team that just signed tons of great free agents is really mind boggling! Have the Eagles had the same HC/OC for many years? Yes, and I wonder if that helps the QB and offense in general? No, that would just be an excuse. There is no reason for the success of the team...it's all the QB just doing it on his own. No plays being sent in, no OLine, no receivers, just a great QB all by himself.

Think about the 9ers inability to build an offensive line for an example. The 9ers have jumped and overpaid for FAs then sat and watched them under acheive due to injury or age. Or by putting them next to other linemen who were incompetent. They have failed to develop the talent they have had and are only now bringing in top level talent for the line.

Now the 9ers have one of the youngest groups of linemen in the NFL. If they cut Wragge they will have only Goodwin and Snyder with reasonable experience for a lineman. But, Harbaugh is a crafty guy and he will try to use deception, movement and play variety to give the line an edge.

If Bradford succeeds good for him. I wish him well. That does not mean he should be used as a foil to berate Smith. Their experience is very different and you can't change that just by holding your breath and stamping your foot (metaphorically). Smith will either play well this year or he won't. At the end of the year we can hope the team is much improved...or we can hope our players fail.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Shaj:
all franchises make bad decisions. Philadelphia just made one of their offensive coaches the head defensive coach for their team, which every zoner here would use as an excuse if that was our team, but they will still experience success, most of all because their QB is Michael Vick. You just don't notice or have reason to discuss bad decisions when you have a very, very good QB on the team who rises above everything and gives you reason to focus on the good. Bradford just got a new OC and new system, and they were also the worst team in the league 2 years ago, and he came from a non-pro style offense in college, but you won't see Rams fans making excuses because the kid just flat out plays. Greatness transcends excuses. Ineptitude begs for excuses.

You are the one coming up with excuses to dump on one player for the failure of a team. Comparing the 9ers decsion making over the past EIGHT YEARS with what you consider to be a mishire of a coach on a team that just signed tons of great free agents is really mind boggling! Have the Eagles had the same HC/OC for many years? Yes, and I wonder if that helps the QB and offense in general? No, that would just be an excuse. There is no reason for the success of the team...it's all the QB just doing it on his own. No plays being sent in, no OLine, no receivers, just a great QB all by himself.

Think about the 9ers inability to build an offensive line for an example. The 9ers have jumped and overpaid for FAs then sat and watched them under acheive due to injury or age. Or by putting them next to other linemen who were incompetent. They have failed to develop the talent they have had and are only now bringing in top level talent for the line.

Now the 9ers have one of the youngest groups of linemen in the NFL. If they cut Wragge they will have only Goodwin and Snyder with reasonable experience for a lineman. But, Harbaugh is a crafty guy and he will try to use deception, movement and play variety to give the line an edge.

If Bradford succeeds good for him. I wish him well. That does not mean he should be used as a foil to berate Smith. Their experience is very different and you can't change that just by holding your breath and stamping your foot (metaphorically). Smith will either play well this year or he won't. At the end of the year we can hope the team is much improved...or we can hope our players fail.

If Bradford went 3 - 13 in his first year, everyone would have chalked it up to him going to the worst team in the NFL, most of all us, if we were Rams fans. You guys don't get it. When Smith is deserving of credit, you heap it on. When he f's up, it's not his fault. Everybody else is to blame.

The guy is likeable, hard working, dedicated, team above money and himself, intellectual, and athletic. However, he does not have accuracy, instinct, or leadership, and those are three fatal flaws for playing the QB position in the NFL. And because of all of his positive traits, people somehow overlook the obvious: He can't win a game of checkers, much less professional football.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by Rsrkshn:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by Rsrkshn:

Originally posted by Shaj:
Failure around you becomes pervasive when you are a bad QB. That is where we fundamentally see things differently, is relational cause and effect. There are mitigating circumstances, to be sure, but I believe great QBs make players look talented and coaches look like skilled game planners, and bad QBs make players look inept and get their coaches fired.

This is fundamental. I'm truly surprised that some many people don't get this.

Can't see anyone winning with the 2005 Niners

How is this related to what Shaj just said? I sincerely hope that it's not meant ot be in the nature of a rebuttal.

He's saying a good QB couldn't have even made the other 49ers players look good. QB is indeed the most important position, but at some point.. coaches need to do their job too. Can't pin it all on the QB. Also can't pin it all on coaches and QB either. Sometimes QB's and Coaches can only do so much with the talent around them.

With the 2005 49ers you had poor coaching + poor talent. That will always equate to epic failure.

Bad coaching + good talent can also = failure. See Dennis Erickson. In 2003, he had a pro-bowl QB and WR with Garcia and Owens. Had Garrison Hearst. Had on OL with a healthy Eric Heitmann, Jeremy Newberry, Ron Stone and Scott Gragg. Team went 7-9.

Other examples:
Rich Gannon / Kerry Collins on the 2004 Raiders (team went 5-11)
Jay Cutler on the Broncos in 2007 (team went 7-9 under Shanahan)
Carson Palmer on the Bengals in 2007 (team went 7-9)
Brett Favre on the Packers in 2005 (team went 4-12)
Aaron Rodgers on the Packers in 2008 (team went 6-10)
Donovan McNabb in 2005 (team went 6-10)
Kyle Orton in 2010 (team went 4-12)
John Elway in 1990 (team went 5-11)
John Elway in 1994 (team went 7-9)
Dan Marino in 1988 (team went 4-12)

Why didn't ALL of these players make everyone else around them look great in those seasons? Why didn't they all "elevate" the play of everyone around them? I'll tell you why. Because the QB can only do his job the best he can, and if everyone else fails and the team loses, you can't blame it all on the QB. Saying the rest of the team sucked because the QB didn't help to "elevate" their level of play is a total BS argument.

This isn't to say Alex is good, cause he's not. But it's to say that pinning the rest of the teams failure on him is pretty ridiculous. Alex wasn't great, but those early teams were a pile of horse crap, both in terms of talent and coaching. As evidenced above, under circumstances like the 49ers have had for a while, when those have occurred on other teams.. Not even Hall of Fame QB's were able to overcome them, and the team failed.

Wooh dude. Way too many facts in this post. This is NT. Get that crap out of here

Seriously though I doubt you'll get a rebuttal.

Originally posted by Shaj:

If Bradford went 3 - 13 in his first year, everyone would have chalked it up to him going to the worst team in the NFL, most of all us, if we were Rams fans. You guys don't get it. When Smith is deserving of credit, you heap it on. When he f's up, it's not his fault. Everybody else is to blame.

The guy is likeable, hard working, dedicated, team above money and himself, intellectual, and athletic. However, he does not have accuracy, instinct, or leadership, and those are three fatal flaws for playing the QB position in the NFL. And because of all of his positive traits, people somehow overlook the obvious: He can't win a game of checkers, much less professional football.

I tend to disagree. I think most of the posters try to be reasonable and fully blame him for mistakes that are obviously his own doing. I think what happens is, when certain situations occur, like a ball thrown at a receivers head -- on target -- and it's batted up in the air like a volleyball, you will see the arguments pop up on determining fault. Some will say it's the receiver for not looking the ball in and having stone hands. Others will say it's the QB for "throwing it too hard" or something like that.

Then it moves into, "He had to throw it hard cause he had no time." Then the responses. "He had time." "No he didn't." Circle back and forth. Both sides have made valid arguments before. It's like everyone's fighting so hard to "make it even." The same way you say some "heap it on" when he does something good, is the same way other "heap it on" when something bad happens with him at QB, whether clearly his fault or not.

Originally posted by aTx49er:

Wooh dude. Way too many facts in this post. This is NT. Get that crap out of here

Seriously though I doubt you'll get a rebuttal.

Not expecting one. I take the silence as a clear indicator of one point being proven, and another point being devastatingly refuted.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by Rsrkshn:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:

Originally posted by Rsrkshn:

Originally posted by Shaj:
Failure around you becomes pervasive when you are a bad QB. That is where we fundamentally see things differently, is relational cause and effect. There are mitigating circumstances, to be sure, but I believe great QBs make players look talented and coaches look like skilled game planners, and bad QBs make players look inept and get their coaches fired.

This is fundamental. I'm truly surprised that some many people don't get this.

Can't see anyone winning with the 2005 Niners

How is this related to what Shaj just said? I sincerely hope that it's not meant ot be in the nature of a rebuttal.

He's saying a good QB couldn't have even made the other 49ers players look good. QB is indeed the most important position, but at some point.. coaches need to do their job too. Can't pin it all on the QB. Also can't pin it all on coaches and QB either. Sometimes QB's and Coaches can only do so much with the talent around them.

With the 2005 49ers you had poor coaching + poor talent. That will always equate to epic failure.

Bad coaching + good talent can also = failure. See Dennis Erickson. In 2003, he had a pro-bowl QB and WR with Garcia and Owens. Had Garrison Hearst. Had on OL with a healthy Eric Heitmann, Jeremy Newberry, Ron Stone and Scott Gragg. Team went 7-9.

Other examples:
Rich Gannon / Kerry Collins on the 2004 Raiders (team went 5-11)
Jay Cutler on the Broncos in 2007 (team went 7-9 under Shanahan)
Carson Palmer on the Bengals in 2007 (team went 7-9)
Brett Favre on the Packers in 2005 (team went 4-12)
Aaron Rodgers on the Packers in 2008 (team went 6-10)
Donovan McNabb in 2005 (team went 6-10)
Kyle Orton in 2010 (team went 4-12)
John Elway in 1990 (team went 5-11)
John Elway in 1994 (team went 7-9)
Dan Marino in 1988 (team went 4-12)

Why didn't ALL of these players make everyone else around them look great in those seasons? Why didn't they all "elevate" the play of everyone around them? I'll tell you why. Because the QB can only do his job the best he can, and if everyone else fails and the team loses, you can't blame it all on the QB. Saying the rest of the team sucked because the QB didn't help to "elevate" their level of play is a total BS argument.

This isn't to say Alex is good, cause he's not. But it's to say that pinning the rest of the teams failure on him is pretty ridiculous. Alex wasn't great, but those early teams were a pile of horse crap, both in terms of talent and coaching. As evidenced above, under circumstances like the 49ers have had for a while, when those have occurred on other teams.. Not even Hall of Fame QB's were able to overcome them, and the team failed.

You are picking singular anomolous years. There was a year where Einstein submitted a theory to a global scientists convention that was incorrectly calculated as well (true story). Does that make him a dumb ass? Hell no. Why not compare Smith's career stats to other QB *careers*, instead of picking out one highly convenient year from some great QB's? That's when your analysis becomes embarrassing. If you want to play it straight, look no further than Tim Couch. Smith's career has been near identical to his, actually worst statistically, if I recall correctly.

P.S. - you also did not include QBR in those stats, which further diverts the pack.

Shaj it would have saved you time to just write, "didn't read, lol."

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by aTx49er:
Wooh dude. Way too many facts in this post. This is NT. Get that crap out of here

Seriously though I doubt you'll get a rebuttal.

Not expecting one. I take the silence as a clear indicator of one point being proven, and another point being devastatingly refuted.

Or it could mean that not everyone spends all of their time on the Webzone. Unlike some who don't have a life and just post into the thousands all day long.

To the point: Nothing you say in your long-winded and tedious post, much of it possibly true (I admit to have not read it through) refutes the veracity of Shaj's statement. Which was thankfully short and to the point. Nor did it refute my statement. So your statements re "point proven" is really moot.

If you're incapable of seeing that and have to resort to making smug self serving statements, I cannot help you. (Even though it does hurt me to say so because I do find a lot of your posts to be informative).

PS: I am now leaving the 'zone, so expect another interlude of "whipped silence".

That's about where he should be.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by LambdaChi49:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:


Bad coaching + good talent can also = failure. See Dennis Erickson. In 2003, he had a pro-bowl QB and WR with Garcia and Owens. Had Garrison Hearst. Had on OL with a healthy Eric Heitmann, Jeremy Newberry, Ron Stone and Scott Gragg. Team went 7-9.

OMG I would kill to have that line right now. What a perfect example of what a difference coaching makes. This is what separates the fans who truly have been following this team vs the fans who are casual 9er fans that catch the ESPN highlights. Nice man.

I mean, seriously. When you have bad coaching, teams fail. When you have inferior talent, teams fail. Alex -- although not a good player himself -- was surrounded by BOTH. How the FRICK is he supposed to succeed with that?

As mediocre as Alex played, this team was 1 and 2 games out of the playoffs each of the past two seasons. If Alex produced the same amount he has been, and our defense is even slightly better... with better coaching this is a playoff team.

Last year's playoff miss can sure as heck be blamed a bunch of other players than Alex. 1 more win. That's all we needed. A lot of what if's..

What if Philip Adams hadn't fumbled the punt against the Saints? What if Baas hadn't snapped the ball for a safety?
What if Clements hadn't fumbled the interception against Atlanta?
What if Singletary had started Alex against St. Louis?
What if the line hadn't let a free rusher pancake Alex in the Panthers game? And what if Carr didn't throw the game away after that?

4 games most will argue we should have won. You could argue coaching had its hand in 3 of those losses.

1) Telling Clements to get down and/or protect the ball.
2) Seeing Smith's track record against the Rams, and considering the fact that he DESTROYED Seattle a week prior. But because Smith had a tough time and threw ONE interception against the NFL's #1 Defense in San Diego, he started Troy.
3) Carr clearly was not ready to play. Why even put him out there?

1) "What if Philip Adams hadn't fumbled the punt against the Saints? What if Baas hadn't snapped the ball for a safety?"

Well what if Alex Smith doesn't make that s**tty overthrow on the short dump to Gore for the INT?

2)"What if Clements hadn't fumbled the interception against Atlanta?"
Well what if Alex Smith hadn't thrown those two god awful picks. One int was an overthrow short over the middle and the other directly into coverage. And what if Smith doesn't get that retarded intentional grounding penalty to kick us out of potential field goal range?


3) "What if Singletary had started Alex against St. Louis?"
Who knows? Its not like its a guarantee mr. inconsistant wold light it up. What if he tucks the ball away on that last drive where he fumbled? We could have made the playoffs.


4) "What if the line hadn't let a free rusher pancake Alex in the Panthers game? And what if Carr didn't throw the game away after that?"
This is football. He took a hit and that's unfortunate. And f**k Carr.

5) What if Alex doesn't make that silly fumble in the Eagles game? What if he doesn't throw that game losing TD?

If you want to call out coaching, Baas, Clements, Adams, the O-Line for dumb mistakes thats fine. But look whose name keeps coming up again and again and again?

I agree with you that we do need good coaches in order to have success. The jury is still out on Harbaugh but i have hope, despite the move to get Smith. At least he tried to get Hassebeck in here as well. That would have been sweet. But do you really need a brilliant coach to show 6 year NFL veteran how to make accurate short throws, not make boneheaded fumbles, and not throw into coverage?

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Shaj it would have saved you time to just write, "didn't read, lol."

My first thought was -- was my post even read? Who said these QB's had down years? They didn't. They were outstanding. But the team still failed. Simple point was, even if a QB can be outstanding or be under good coaching, the team can still fail. When you have a bad QB (Alex Smith) surrounded by bad coaching AND bad talent, what to you expect? Failure is virtually guaranteed.

Alex Smith plays bad enough by himself, but when you have a bunch of bad players and bad coaches around him, I'd like to see them get some of the blame too for the failures of the team, instead of passing off their failures ONTO Alex Smith (i.e. "Coach Killer" etc.) That's all I'm saying. I see this far too often and people act like we have no other problems. QB is a major problem, but so are a crapload of other positions.

Anyone that quotes me and acts like I'm trying to call Alex Smith a good QB clearly has not read or understood what I'm getting at in these previous posts.

Whenever I compare Alex Smith to Tim Couch, people pretend like they didn't read it. Find me one other #1 pick QB with stats closer to Alex's, and then explain yourself out of the conundrum it presents. (you'll also have to explain why, in Couch's case, it was his ineptitude that caused the problems while in Alex's case, it was the ineptitude of everyone around him that caused the problems). Somehow Alex is the teflon kid. Nothing sticks to him. He needs to be in politics, not football.

Originally posted by Shaj:
Whenever I compare Alex Smith to Tim Couch, people pretend like they didn't read it. Find me one other #1 pick QB with stats closer to Alex's, and then explain yourself out of the conundrum it presents. (you'll also have to explain why, in Couch's case, it was his ineptitude that caused the problems while in Alex's case, it was the ineptitude of everyone around him that caused the problems). Somehow Alex is the teflon kid. Nothing sticks to him. He needs to be in politics, not football.

you never respond to any statistical arguments, so why should anyone respond to your claims? If it makes you happy, Yes, Alex Smith and Tim Couch have similar numbers. So? That doesn't refute anything posters like myself or OTC have said, in terms of analyzing the team context of Alex Smith's personal failures. Tim Couch failed on an expansion team; the 2005 49ers were just as un-talented.

I laid out the stats comparing Smith's 2006 season to Bradford's rookie season in response to a post of yours praising Bradford's greatness and criticizing Smith's below-average year (in 2006). I'll add to that Smith's QBR that season was 74.8 and Bradford's last season was 76.5.