ESPN Ranking NFL starting quarterbacks (Alex Smith #28)

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

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.

I don't dispute this other than to point out mitigating circumstances...and to point out I do not see Smith as a bumbling, stumbling QB. He is intelligent, hard working and often looks the part of a good QB. He has lacked consistency and seems ill prepared much of the time. That will not happen as much under Harbaugh. If Smith can't turn it up a notch with a very good scheme and adequate protection I will expect JH to find another guy for the job.

As for getting coaches fired? No, bad coaches get themselves fired. So far, the coaches who were decent OCs for Smith were hired within a year to be HCs elsewhere. The ones who were not good were replaced. Nolan a good HC? No. Singletary a good HC? Absolutely not. So you would have to point out a good coach who was fired because of the QB before I would buy it. It is more common that a semi-poor coach rides the coattails of a qreat QB.

Finally, I just don't see how anyone can witness the terrible decisions made by this franchise over the past eight years and blame a young QB. Smith is just now turning the age of the average QB who becomes a starter and yet he has been forced into service from the first year when he was almost as ill-prepared as CK.

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 don't think Eagles fans are criticizing Reid for hiring Castillo?

I'm not sure what "zoners would use as an excuse if that was our team" means. An excuse for what? The 49ers equivalent is the hiring of Jim Hostler, I guess. Does anyone use that as an excuse for something, and, if so, what?

Bradford does not "flat out play." He had a pretty good rookie season overall, but is not a great player. At least not yet. His potential is great and he looks the part, but people keep talking about him like he's Dan Marino.

They may be complaining, they are not using it as an excuse, *because there is nothing to excuse*. And for the record, only about 300 people here used Hostler as an excuse for our poor offense, and then Jimmy Raye.

Bradford did what a #1 overall pick going to the worst team in the league is supposed to do: play solid no excuses football. It's a novel concept. Meanwhile, back in wonderland, we're still waiting.

You could not have seen some of the final Ram games last year and make that statement about Bradford. He was impotent against Seattle. He struggled mightily as teams learned that Shurmur only gave him patterns that involved only half the field. When he had to look all across the field he just could not do it. Rams fans were calling for a vet QB to come in and run the team as he was clearly exposed for the rookie he was in the second half of the season.

Also, the Rams were far from the worst team in the league. Yes, the had the worst record but a good deal of their best talent was injured the year before. Last year, the vast improvement of their defense was overlooked by national media that chose to look only at the #1 draft pick. The truth is, the Ram defense improved MORE than the offense improved. In fact, Bradford did NO better than Bulger had done before his injury the previous year. All facts that the media ignored because it wasn't sexy to give credit to Spagnuolo for improving the defense so dramatically.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Young2Rice, we are not in disagreement. Smith contributed to several losses. That's not the argument. We already have established -- from a multitude of people piling on talking about Smith's obvious failures -- that Alex had his part. What we're trying to get across is the bigger picture here that people seemingly ignore. Which is the fact that just as much as you could blame Smith, you could blame a plethora of others -- from players to coaches.

Who knows what would've happened if Smith had started the Tampa, Green Bay, and St. Louis games. Troy Smith was horrendous in all three. Losing 21-0 to the Bucs (at home in SF), losing 34-16 to GB, and the being benched in STL for Alex. Obviously Smith did nothing to lose any of those games. The team failed for a variety of reasons that go almost completely ignored.

Have no problem with anyone saying Alex, the coaches, and etc. all contributed to losses. That's the truth. But it doesn't change the fact that as mediocre as he played in some games -- he did well enough to win,[/b] if it hadn't been for someone else making a critical mistake at a terrible time. I think they should just share the blame. That's all.

How can you do well enough to win while making a fatal mistakes almost every game? Smith is the king of inopportune mistakes. Its not like Smith goes in there with blazing numbers to help us win.

My point is that players will make mistakes like Clements, Adams, and Baas did. But do those players make terrble mistakes each and every week? No. But Smith pretty much does. He contributes to losses way more then he helps (Two 300 games only).

And we don't know what Smith would be like against the Bucs or the PAckers but in all likeliness, as you can see from the past, Smith fails against teams with winning records.

Just because several other players make mistakes each game doesn't excuse the horrendous mistakes he makes almost every game. That's like saying Kwame Harris' stupid mistakes every game should be shared by the team. We should give em a call to apologize for putting too much blame on him. Its not just his fault he contributed to a loss every game...so did Gore fumbling, VD drops Smith turnovers etc...VD and Gore are still on the team but Harris is gone like Smith should be.

You absolutely refuse to acknowledge what I'm saying, don't you? Look at the bolded. Despite us agreeing, it's like you just want to argue for the sake of arguing? What are you even arguing about? It's like you can't bear the thought of agreeing with me, haha. So you have to keep saying the same things. Man, seriously. Alex has definitely made mistakes at critical times, and so have other players. Not once have I excused Smith's mistakes. He deserves to be held fully responsible for his own mistakes, just as the others deserve to be held accountable for theirs. Clements was a MAJOR player in costing us the ATL games. Smith shouldn't be excused for his mistakes during the game, so why should Clements be excused for his? Simple fact is he coughed up a fumble with a minute to go that ultimately wound up leading to us losing the game. Smith didn't play well, but we had the lead, and Clements' mistake allowed Atlanta to take it away. There's plenty of blame to go around for these several specific losses. Period. Anyone saying otherwise -- or saying "It's all on Alex" doesn't have a clue.

"Have no problem with anyone saying Alex, the coaches, and etc. all contributed to losses. That's the truth. But it doesn't change the fact that as mediocre as he played in some games -- he did well enough to win,[/b] if it hadn't been for someone else making a critical mistake at a terrible time. I think they should just share the blame. That's all."

How can you say that he plays mediocre and that is "well enough to win." You just excused it right that. "he played well enough to win." Despite all the mistakes? No he doesn't. So in the ATL game, Smiths 126 yards, 1 td, two ints that were all on him, an intentional grounding is "well enough to win?" The infamous Eagles game fumble in the 4th quarter ( ) and the game losing interception is well enough to win? He didn't play well enough to win. We had to overcome his errors blunders along with any other blunders the team made. Smith does not play good enough to win. Thats excusing his mistakes.

I totally understand your point. Other players were culpable in our losses last year. I aknowledge that. So i fully understand what you mean. I'm arguing with you because you are not agreeing that Smith makes the most mistakes on the 49ers. I'm trying to argue that other players do make mistakes, but Smith was culpable more often then any other 49er. Smith, individually, is the only one making bone headed plays game after game. If you talley all the retard plays made by the players, Smith will be at the top of the list. I cited at least 3 earlier in this thread. Some of those mistakes he made were high school amateur hour (Eagles fumble, Saints dump overthrow, ATL throwing into coverage). Is that a little more clear now? Not trying to be an a*****e just trying to get my point across.

I'm not making excuses for Clements. He should of tucked the ball away or gone out of bounds there no doubt. His bad. How many other game costly boneheaded mistakes has Clements made to lose us a game? I can't think of any. Maybe for s**tty coverage here and there, but thats why he's gone now.
In that ATL game, Smith threw for like 130 yards 1 td and two horrible interceptions. And had a costly penatly. Clements fumbling the ball was a mistake, but it did not cause us to lose. It just made it easier for them to win. We still had a chance to stop them even after the fumble. Plus, if Clements goes down, we kick a FG and ATL still has time to make a come back. That is no better or worse then the play of Alex Smith that day. Smith had just a big, if not bigger, role in that loss then Clements did. Smith had THREE wtf moments and Clements had one. We were up in that game despite Smith's abysmal performance. Our Defense held their high powered offense in check and our O, led by Smith, put up 7 points.

There is plenty of blame to go around I agree. I'm not saying its all Alex, that would be ridiculous. But Smith solely makes a bone headed play in nearly every game. Its one of the few constants on the 49ers. You know its coming like we knew Kwame Harris was going to get a penalty or blow an assignment just like you knew Alex Smith will make a WTF play sooner or later. Somtimes Smith makes more then one per game...

Anyone who doesn't see that Smith's bone headed mistakes have cost us several games doesn't have a clue either.

That's fair enough for the most part. Rather than prolong the argument trying to make new sets of points etc. -- I say we just agree to disagree on the minute details of the discussion. This is probably the closest we're going to get to a real agreement, heh.

All that said, I'm just anxious for the season to start.

Go Niners.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
That's fair enough for the most part. Rather than prolong the argument trying to make new sets of points etc. -- I say we just agree to disagree on the minute details of the discussion. This is probably the closest we're going to get to a real agreement, heh.

All that said, I'm just anxious for the season to start.

Go Niners.

Well said!

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

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.

I don't dispute this other than to point out mitigating circumstances...and to point out I do not see Smith as a bumbling, stumbling QB. He is intelligent, hard working and often looks the part of a good QB. He has lacked consistency and seems ill prepared much of the time. That will not happen as much under Harbaugh. If Smith can't turn it up a notch with a very good scheme and adequate protection I will expect JH to find another guy for the job.

As for getting coaches fired? No, bad coaches get themselves fired. So far, the coaches who were decent OCs for Smith were hired within a year to be HCs elsewhere. The ones who were not good were replaced. Nolan a good HC? No. Singletary a good HC? Absolutely not. So you would have to point out a good coach who was fired because of the QB before I would buy it. It is more common that a semi-poor coach rides the coattails of a qreat QB.

Finally, I just don't see how anyone can witness the terrible decisions made by this franchise over the past eight years and blame a young QB. Smith is just now turning the age of the average QB who becomes a starter and yet he has been forced into service from the first year when he was almost as ill-prepared as CK.

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 don't think Eagles fans are criticizing Reid for hiring Castillo?

I'm not sure what "zoners would use as an excuse if that was our team" means. An excuse for what? The 49ers equivalent is the hiring of Jim Hostler, I guess. Does anyone use that as an excuse for something, and, if so, what?

Bradford does not "flat out play." He had a pretty good rookie season overall, but is not a great player. At least not yet. His potential is great and he looks the part, but people keep talking about him like he's Dan Marino.

They may be complaining, they are not using it as an excuse, *because there is nothing to excuse*. And for the record, only about 300 people here used Hostler as an excuse for our poor offense, and then Jimmy Raye.

Bradford did what a #1 overall pick going to the worst team in the league is supposed to do: play solid no excuses football. It's a novel concept. Meanwhile, back in wonderland, we're still waiting.

You could not have seen some of the final Ram games last year and make that statement about Bradford. He was impotent against Seattle. He struggled mightily as teams learned that Shurmur only gave him patterns that involved only half the field. When he had to look all across the field he just could not do it. Rams fans were calling for a vet QB to come in and run the team as he was clearly exposed for the rookie he was in the second half of the season.

Also, the Rams were far from the worst team in the league. Yes, the had the worst record but a good deal of their best talent was injured the year before. Last year, the vast improvement of their defense was overlooked by national media that chose to look only at the #1 draft pick. The truth is, the Ram defense improved MORE than the offense improved. In fact, Bradford did NO better than Bulger had done before his injury the previous year. All facts that the media ignored because it wasn't sexy to give credit to Spagnuolo for improving the defense so dramatically.

Fair enough, and I trust you are correct about everything you said about Bradford's games last year, however, I want to point out the following:

Bradford's late season slump and resultant bad game(s) would have been just another day in the office for Smith on any given Sunday of his unremarkable 6 year tenure. You are also blaming Bradford personally for playing bad, while at the same time making excuses for the games in which he played WELL (his teammates were better than their worst in league record would indicate), which is exactly my issue: when another QB plays bad, he is personally liable. When another QB plays well, there are third party excuses for why he was able to do so. When Smith plays well, it is because everyone around him finally got their act together, and his skills were able to shine through. When Smith plays poorly, it is back to being the fault of coaches and other players. Worst double standards evar!

Only in NT would John Clayton get 37 pages of responses...

Originally posted by Shaj:
Fair enough, and I trust you are correct about everything you said about Bradford's games last year, however, I want to point out the following:

Bradford's late season slump and resultant bad game(s) would have been just another day in the office for Smith on any given Sunday of his unremarkable 6 year tenure. You are also blaming Bradford personally for playing bad, while at the same time making excuses for the games in which he played WELL (his teammates were better than their worst in league record would indicate), which is exactly my issue: when another QB plays bad, he is personally liable. When another QB plays well, there are third party excuses for why he was able to do so. When Smith plays well, it is because everyone around him finally got their act together, and his skills were able to shine through. When Smith plays poorly, it is back to being the fault of coaches and other players. Worst double standards evar!

Smith usually plays really well the last five or six games of the season, when many people criticise him for doing well in garbage games. It's important to be a finisher and Smith plays better as the season goes on, plays well in the red zone, and does well in the two minute drill. Those facts, and Harbaugh's coaching, give me hope for the season. Your highlighted comment speaks for itself, not as an excuse but as an aspect of reality. No QB does well if all around him are dropping passes and forgetting to block their guy.

You seem unwilling to admit that this is a team game and that all eleven guys need to be perfect (or near perfect) for a play to work. Coaches use metaphors such as "fingers on a hand" or "parts of an engine" when telling their players why they must all work in unison...perfectly. I've been on teams that were undersized, undertalented who were champions; and other teams full of stars who couldn't win a game. I believe you will see a huge difference this year and I certainly hope so!

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Smith usually plays really well the last five or six games of the season, when many people criticise him for doing well in garbage games. It's important to be a finisher and Smith plays better as the season goes on, plays well in the red zone, and does well in the two minute drill. Those facts, and Harbaugh's coaching, give me hope for the season. Your highlighted comment speaks for itself, not as an excuse but as an aspect of reality. No QB does well if all around him are dropping passes and forgetting to block their guy.

You seem unwilling to admit that this is a team game and that all eleven guys need to be perfect (or near perfect) for a play to work. Coaches use metaphors such as "fingers on a hand" or "parts of an engine" when telling their players why they must all work in unison...perfectly. I've been on teams that were undersized, undertalented who were champions; and other teams full of stars who couldn't win a game. I believe you will see a huge difference this year and I certainly hope so!

The biggest thing with Alex is consistency. I've always wondered how it's possible to be consistent in something when you don't have a base to be consistent at. How is this team supposed to play with any sort of consistency when everything around them is constantly changing? New coaches, new oc's, new WR's, new OL, going from WCO, to Coryell, to what-ever Hostler ran, then comes this hybrid spread, back to Coryell, all the sudden back to WCO. I mean how do we expect our players to be consistent, when the front office and coaching is not consistent?

Alex was thought by many to be a perfect fit in the WCO coming out of college. He didn't have tremendous arm strength, but could read defenses, move around in the pocket, bootleg(in which we have never really utilized), and make the short quick passes and allow the recievers to do some of the work. Alex is a cerebral QB as we all should know by now. He has to know what he is doing in order for him to be succesful. I honestly think this offense is going to fit him well and now that he knows the offense, that consistency will come. Why is this year any different you may ask? Just the fact that he's the one that taught this offense in camp Alex. Harbaugh even stated how well the team was prepared. I think that right there is the difference. The almighty Urban quote that he has to know what he is doing but once he gets it, boom the lights click on.

Alex Smith is awesome... f**k the haters

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Shaj:
Fair enough, and I trust you are correct about everything you said about Bradford's games last year, however, I want to point out the following:

Bradford's late season slump and resultant bad game(s) would have been just another day in the office for Smith on any given Sunday of his unremarkable 6 year tenure. You are also blaming Bradford personally for playing bad, while at the same time making excuses for the games in which he played WELL (his teammates were better than their worst in league record would indicate), which is exactly my issue: when another QB plays bad, he is personally liable. When another QB plays well, there are third party excuses for why he was able to do so. When Smith plays well, it is because everyone around him finally got their act together, and his skills were able to shine through. When Smith plays poorly, it is back to being the fault of coaches and other players. Worst double standards evar!

Smith usually plays really well the last five or six games of the season, when many people criticise him for doing well in garbage games. It's important to be a finisher and Smith plays better as the season goes on, plays well in the red zone, and does well in the two minute drill. Those facts, and Harbaugh's coaching, give me hope for the season. Your highlighted comment speaks for itself, not as an excuse but as an aspect of reality. No QB does well if all around him are dropping passes and forgetting to block their guy.

You seem unwilling to admit that this is a team game and that all eleven guys need to be perfect (or near perfect) for a play to work. Coaches use metaphors such as "fingers on a hand" or "parts of an engine" when telling their players why they must all work in unison...perfectly. I've been on teams that were undersized, undertalented who were champions; and other teams full of stars who couldn't win a game. I believe you will see a huge difference this year and I certainly hope so!

historically, during the Nolan and Singletary regime, we have ended the season with easy to win games. That is my recollection, do you not agree? Every year we played better at the end. I'm sure if you did a correlation analysis you'd find the harder games were early on in the season.

And as for your other point about 11 guys playing well in order for a play to work, agreed, so why do players like Bradford get personal blame when they play bad and his teammates get the credit when he plays good (i.e. diminishing Bradford's role in delivering exactly what you want from a #1 overall rookie QB),, while the exact opposite is true with Smith (when he plays bad, it's the 11 players + coaches fault and when he plays good, he personally gets credit because the people around him finally stopped dropping passes, allowing sacks, etc; i.e. diminishing Smith's role in NOT delivering what you want from a #1 overall QB, even 6 years later).

You guys aren't reading your own posts I think. The double standards are incredible.

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Fair enough, and I trust you are correct about everything you said about Bradford's games last year, however, I want to point out the following:

Bradford's late season slump and resultant bad game(s) would have been just another day in the office for Smith on any given Sunday of his unremarkable 6 year tenure. You are also blaming Bradford personally for playing bad, while at the same time making excuses for the games in which he played WELL (his teammates were better than their worst in league record would indicate), which is exactly my issue: when another QB plays bad, he is personally liable. When another QB plays well, there are third party excuses for why he was able to do so. When Smith plays well, it is because everyone around him finally got their act together, and his skills were able to shine through. When Smith plays poorly, it is back to being the fault of coaches and other players. Worst double standards evar!

Smith usually plays really well the last five or six games of the season, when many people criticise him for doing well in garbage games. It's important to be a finisher and Smith plays better as the season goes on, plays well in the red zone, and does well in the two minute drill. Those facts, and Harbaugh's coaching, give me hope for the season. Your highlighted comment speaks for itself, not as an excuse but as an aspect of reality. No QB does well if all around him are dropping passes and forgetting to block their guy.

You seem unwilling to admit that this is a team game and that all eleven guys need to be perfect (or near perfect) for a play to work. Coaches use metaphors such as "fingers on a hand" or "parts of an engine" when telling their players why they must all work in unison...perfectly. I've been on teams that were undersized, undertalented who were champions; and other teams full of stars who couldn't win a game. I believe you will see a huge difference this year and I certainly hope so!

historically, during the Nolan and Singletary regime, we have ended the season with easy to win games. That is my recollection, do you not agree? Every year we played better at the end. I'm sure if you did a correlation analysis you'd find the harder games were early on in the season.



And as for your other point about 11 guys playing well in order for a play to work, agreed, so why do players like Bradford get personal blame when they play bad and his teammates get the credit when he plays good (i.e. diminishing Bradford's role in delivering exactly what you want from a #1 overall rookie QB),, while the exact opposite is true with Smith (when he plays bad, it's the 11 players + coaches fault and when he plays good, he personally gets credit because the people around him finally stopped dropping passes, allowing sacks, etc; i.e. diminishing Smith's role in NOT delivering what you want from a #1 overall QB, even 6 years later).



You guys aren't reading your own posts I think. The double standards are incredible.

Sounds like you're just making s**t up to support your claims. I've never seen anyone say smith is blameless

Originally posted by BayAreaBrawler:
Alex Smith is awesome... f**k the haters

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Shaj:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

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.

I don't dispute this other than to point out mitigating circumstances...and to point out I do not see Smith as a bumbling, stumbling QB. He is intelligent, hard working and often looks the part of a good QB. He has lacked consistency and seems ill prepared much of the time. That will not happen as much under Harbaugh. If Smith can't turn it up a notch with a very good scheme and adequate protection I will expect JH to find another guy for the job.

As for getting coaches fired? No, bad coaches get themselves fired. So far, the coaches who were decent OCs for Smith were hired within a year to be HCs elsewhere. The ones who were not good were replaced. Nolan a good HC? No. Singletary a good HC? Absolutely not. So you would have to point out a good coach who was fired because of the QB before I would buy it. It is more common that a semi-poor coach rides the coattails of a qreat QB.

Finally, I just don't see how anyone can witness the terrible decisions made by this franchise over the past eight years and blame a young QB. Smith is just now turning the age of the average QB who becomes a starter and yet he has been forced into service from the first year when he was almost as ill-prepared as CK.

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 don't think Eagles fans are criticizing Reid for hiring Castillo?

I'm not sure what "zoners would use as an excuse if that was our team" means. An excuse for what? The 49ers equivalent is the hiring of Jim Hostler, I guess. Does anyone use that as an excuse for something, and, if so, what?

Bradford does not "flat out play." He had a pretty good rookie season overall, but is not a great player. At least not yet. His potential is great and he looks the part, but people keep talking about him like he's Dan Marino.

They may be complaining, they are not using it as an excuse, *because there is nothing to excuse*. And for the record, only about 300 people here used Hostler as an excuse for our poor offense, and then Jimmy Raye.

Bradford did what a #1 overall pick going to the worst team in the league is supposed to do: play solid no excuses football. It's a novel concept. Meanwhile, back in wonderland, we're still waiting.

You could not have seen some of the final Ram games last year and make that statement about Bradford. He was impotent against Seattle. He struggled mightily as teams learned that Shurmur only gave him patterns that involved only half the field. When he had to look all across the field he just could not do it. Rams fans were calling for a vet QB to come in and run the team as he was clearly exposed for the rookie he was in the second half of the season.

Also, the Rams were far from the worst team in the league. Yes, the had the worst record but a good deal of their best talent was injured the year before. Last year, the vast improvement of their defense was overlooked by national media that chose to look only at the #1 draft pick. The truth is, the Ram defense improved MORE than the offense improved. In fact, Bradford did NO better than Bulger had done before his injury the previous year. All facts that the media ignored because it wasn't sexy to give credit to Spagnuolo for improving the defense so dramatically.

Fair enough, and I trust you are correct about everything you said about Bradford's games last year, however, I want to point out the following:

Bradford's late season slump and resultant bad game(s) would have been just another day in the office for Smith on any given Sunday of his unremarkable 6 year tenure. You are also blaming Bradford personally for playing bad, while at the same time making excuses for the games in which he played WELL (his teammates were better than their worst in league record would indicate), which is exactly my issue: when another QB plays bad, he is personally liable. When another QB plays well, there are third party excuses for why he was able to do so. When Smith plays well, it is because everyone around him finally got their act together, and his skills were able to shine through. When Smith plays poorly, it is back to being the fault of coaches and other players. Worst double standards evar!

You are reading my post through your "Smith Filter."

You made a statement about Bradford alluding to him being the difference between the worst team in the league and one in the chase for the division championship. My response was to say that was a substantial over-statement. Yes, he had some good games early in the season in which he played well though mediocre in others, but even in those games, the much improved Ram defense was giving him good field position and protecting leads that resulted in wins. Compare that to the NO and Atl game where the 49er defense gave the win away.

I'll wrap this right here: Alex Smith has shown more than enough in PS to indicate this team has a legit NFL starter that can put up a QBR in the high 80s in the WCO. What has happened in the past is irrelevant. Harbaugh saw enough in Smith to pass on McNabb and Kolb and a couple of other QB name that were tossed around. I am going to trust my overall judgement based on a lot of years watching pro football and Harbaugh's observations to say that Alex is going to have a good season.

Now it is time to get ready for some football.

Originally posted by Shaj:
historically, during the Nolan and Singletary regime, we have ended the season with easy to win games. That is my recollection, do you not agree? Every year we played better at the end. I'm sure if you did a correlation analysis you'd find the harder games were early on in the season.

And as for your other point about 11 guys playing well in order for a play to work, agreed, so why do players like Bradford get personal blame when they play bad and his teammates get the credit when he plays good (i.e. diminishing Bradford's role in delivering exactly what you want from a #1 overall rookie QB),, while the exact opposite is true with Smith (when he plays bad, it's the 11 players + coaches fault and when he plays good, he personally gets credit because the people around him finally stopped dropping passes, allowing sacks, etc; i.e. diminishing Smith's role in NOT delivering what you want from a #1 overall QB, even 6 years later).

You guys aren't reading your own posts I think. The double standards are incredible.

Don't know where you have read a post where I have denigrated Bradford. He is a bright young QB who may be great. You might have read that I give credit to his coaches, receivers, OLinemen and RBs as well as Bradford for any success they have or any failure they endure. Same with Smith, et.al.

As a matter of fact, the anti Smith crowd have been the ones to bring up Bradford as if he is such a great example of how bad Smith is. Not a very good argument in my opinion, but then an argument to the contrary is criticized by you for being harsh on Bradford. Oh well, horse races and pancakes!

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Shaj:
historically, during the Nolan and Singletary regime, we have ended the season with easy to win games. That is my recollection, do you not agree? Every year we played better at the end. I'm sure if you did a correlation analysis you'd find the harder games were early on in the season.

And as for your other point about 11 guys playing well in order for a play to work, agreed, so why do players like Bradford get personal blame when they play bad and his teammates get the credit when he plays good (i.e. diminishing Bradford's role in delivering exactly what you want from a #1 overall rookie QB),, while the exact opposite is true with Smith (when he plays bad, it's the 11 players + coaches fault and when he plays good, he personally gets credit because the people around him finally stopped dropping passes, allowing sacks, etc; i.e. diminishing Smith's role in NOT delivering what you want from a #1 overall QB, even 6 years later).

You guys aren't reading your own posts I think. The double standards are incredible.

Don't know where you have read a post where I have denigrated Bradford. He is a bright young QB who may be great. You might have read that I give credit to his coaches, receivers, OLinemen and RBs as well as Bradford for any success they have or any failure they endure. Same with Smith, et.al.

As a matter of fact, the anti Smith crowd have been the ones to bring up Bradford as if he is such a great example of how bad Smith is. Not a very good argument in my opinion, but then an argument to the contrary is criticized by you for being harsh on Bradford. Oh well, horse races and pancakes!

Gotta be a gif for that...