QB Competition

Originally posted by TheGoldStandard:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by Joecool:


1700 yard back with a defense that finished the last 8 games ranked 7th. You tell me why we didn't make the playoffs.

Demand a link... otherwise, you are full of BS and to never be believed again. Thanks...

well with 6 weeks to go we were 5-5 that season.

We were coming off of a 3 game win streak in which we gave up a total of 30 points. We had 12 turnovers on D over that span.

We followed up the next 3 weeks with a 3 game losing streak in which we surrendered a total of 84 points. We had 1 turnover on D in that span.

Season over.

Your revisionist history aside, we were a team that year that played over our heads (we had 6 wins the total the two years prior) for a time, collapsed under the pressure down the stretch, then rebounded with a couple of wins once the pressure was off.

Our D gave up at least 300 yards every game the final 7 weeks of the season, in fact we gave up 300 yards or more in every game but 3 that season, all wins coincidentally. When the D held, the offense was good enough to win, unfortunately the D rarely held. We gave up 25.8 points per game, which for the year was good enough for a dead last finish in the entire league.

But, of course this was all Alex Smith's fault.

Good research, Gold. To say the Niners didn't make the playoffs in '06 because of Alex Smith is laughable.

Can't wait till tonight. Go Alex!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by TheGoldStandard:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by Joecool:


1700 yard back with a defense that finished the last 8 games ranked 7th. You tell me why we didn't make the playoffs.

Demand a link... otherwise, you are full of BS and to never be believed again. Thanks...

well with 6 weeks to go we were 5-5 that season.

We were coming off of a 3 game win streak in which we gave up a total of 30 points. We had 12 turnovers on D over that span.

We followed up the next 3 weeks with a 3 game losing streak in which we surrendered a total of 84 points. We had 1 turnover on D in that span.

Season over.

Your revisionist history aside, we were a team that year that played over our heads (we had 6 wins the total the two years prior) for a time, collapsed under the pressure down the stretch, then rebounded with a couple of wins once the pressure was off.

Our D gave up at least 300 yards every game the final 7 weeks of the season, in fact we gave up 300 yards or more in every game but 3 that season, all wins coincidentally. When the D held, the offense was good enough to win, unfortunately the D rarely held. We gave up 25.8 points per game, which for the year was good enough for a dead last finish in the entire league.

But, of course this was all Alex Smith's fault.

Good research, Gold. To say the Niners didn't make the playoffs in '06 because of Alex Smith is laughable.

It all started in week 9, when the "games didn't matter". I didn't know that's the case in week 9.

week 9: Vikings 3, 49ers 9
week 10: DET 13, 49ers 19
week 11: SEA 14, 49ers 20
week 12: STL 20, 49ERS 17
week 13: NO 34, 49ERS 10
week 14: GB 30, 49ERS 19
week 15: SEA 14, 49ers 24
week 16: ARI 26, 49ers 20
week 17: DEN 23, 49ers 26

Your numbers don't match with the final game scores. Our defense played very respectable the last 9 games of that season. Only 2 of those games did we give up 30+. Gore carried us on his back during those games.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
If you're going to pin our failure to make the postseason in 2006 on one player -- in a team sport, then i just don't know what to say.

It's not as if Alex missed the field goal that would have sent us to the playoffs or fumbled the hold....

You've lost all objectivity as far as i can see.

-9fA

You can pin it on one play, but there was only one player that year who slowed us down more than a kicker or a holder. I'm just saying, if you want to count plays that could be made that were left on the field, I am sure Alex Smith was more responsible for these than any other person was...I mean, if you want to count the numbers.

Just admit it, the only hope we have going for us is to hope that he is a Troy Aikman because he has sucked the money and possibilities of this team up to this point.

If management even believed he was an average QB in 2006, Alex would not have needed to restructure. If there was any inkling that he has starter capabilities, there would not be a reason for him to restructure.

All arrows for this kid lead to bust. Miracles do happen so let us hope this kid has one in him.

I'm just getting sick and tired of people using his past play as a reason to keep hope. Trend says he will still hold onto the ball too long and throw it late gaining an average of 125 yards a game. Let's hope a miracle happens and he has an out of body experience for the rest of his career.

I can pin 2006 to one player on offense, that player is kwame harris. go check how many big plays or drives he ended.

our d sucked ass! even when they managed to keep the score down, they still gave up time and yards.

Alex Smith never lost playing time because of performance, only to injury!

contract restruture was because he was coming off two shoulder surgeries.

As for Hill, I love him but for all the nut hanging he's got here, he has still yet to clearly beat anyone out for the starting QB position. Even if he wins the starting job, it speaks volumes to how much better Smith is compared to Hill. How else can you honestly explain to any casual football fan why a player who had not played since 2007 is "one" game away from being named the starter over Hill?

Does Shaun Hill remind anybody else of Ricky Bobby?

Originally posted by solidg2000:
As for Hill, I love him but for all the nut hanging he's got here, he has still yet to clearly beat anyone out for the starting QB position. Even if he wins the starting job, it speaks volumes to how much better Smith is compared to Hill. How else can you honestly explain to any casual football fan why a player who had not played since 2007 is "one" game away from being named the starter over Hill?

I think Hill wins the competition, but I gotta agree. Hill should be the one dominating this thing, but the way it's going right now, he's barely ahead of Alex.

s**t, if Alex plays as well as I think he can today, he might just take it from Hill which is saying more about Alex then it does about Hill IMO.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by dbdublin:

Originally posted by TheGoldStandard:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by Joecool:


1700 yard back with a defense that finished the last 8 games ranked 7th. You tell me why we didn't make the playoffs.

Demand a link... otherwise, you are full of BS and to never be believed again. Thanks...

well with 6 weeks to go we were 5-5 that season.

We were coming off of a 3 game win streak in which we gave up a total of 30 points. We had 12 turnovers on D over that span.

We followed up the next 3 weeks with a 3 game losing streak in which we surrendered a total of 84 points. We had 1 turnover on D in that span.

Season over.

Your revisionist history aside, we were a team that year that played over our heads (we had 6 wins the total the two years prior) for a time, collapsed under the pressure down the stretch, then rebounded with a couple of wins once the pressure was off.

Our D gave up at least 300 yards every game the final 7 weeks of the season, in fact we gave up 300 yards or more in every game but 3 that season, all wins coincidentally. When the D held, the offense was good enough to win, unfortunately the D rarely held. We gave up 25.8 points per game, which for the year was good enough for a dead last finish in the entire league.

But, of course this was all Alex Smith's fault.

Good research, Gold. To say the Niners didn't make the playoffs in '06 because of Alex Smith is laughable.

It all started in week 9, when the "games didn't matter". I didn't know that's the case in week 9.

week 9: Vikings 3, 49ers 9
week 10: DET 13, 49ers 19
week 11: SEA 14, 49ers 20
week 12: STL 20, 49ERS 17
week 13: NO 34, 49ERS 10
week 14: GB 30, 49ERS 19
week 15: SEA 14, 49ers 24
week 16: ARI 26, 49ers 20
week 17: DEN 23, 49ers 26

Your numbers don't match with the final game scores. Our defense played very respectable the last 9 games of that season. Only 2 of those games did we give up 30+. Gore carried us on his back during those games.

only 2
you say that as if its a good thing

and everyone knows the turning point of the season was on week 12 vs the rams
first the fumble return for a TD by Harris was called back, then Gores run that put us on StL 8 was called back. Then on 4th and 1 Nolan called out the FG team, even though the whole offense did not want to leave the field and they were arguing while still on the field. On a 3 game win streak and i yard to go!! Why the hell was Robinson running the ball anyways!?!

but whatever, you can make Alex your scape goat if it makes you feel better

My main point was that our defense played very strong in the last half of that season and so was gore. You can pinpoint any game on just one play. My main point was that there was one key position that royally sucked and held the team back and it was Alex. Just try blaming it on the line and I will show you Shaun hills start behind a crappy line also. Hill was playing behind our third string RT last year.

Originally posted by Joecool:
My main point was that our defense played very strong in the last half of that season and so was gore. You can pinpoint any game on just one play. My main point was that there was one key position that royally sucked and held the team back and it was Alex. Just try blaming it on the line and I will show you Shaun hills start behind a crappy line also. Hill was playing behind our third string RT last year.

joe you talkin 06 or the following season, cause alex showed HUGE improvement in 06 under norv. no one can deny that. and if it was the following 2-1, then injured, I don't understand your logic not to mention 289 yards during that loss to the #1 d in the steelers............

Originally posted by TOP_CAT:

Originally posted by solidg2000:
Well by your logic who starts?
Hill only played because of injuries
and Smith
Smith only left the starting job because of in injury

So don't they both deserve it?

Hill has earned it by being a winning QB . Smith was only starting because they were giving him every chance to show he should have been the #1 draft pick (Smith failed,when healthy, to show much of anything to anyone !). Hill did not start last year because of Martz and his desire to have JT and because Hill doesn't have the arm to please Martz.

If Smith has his best camp and preseason ever and finally ,for the first time in his NFL career,starts to show something more than his always mediocre play,then I have no objection to that "new" Smith being Hill's backup or if a miracle happens as the starter (LOL).
But from what I know right now about the 3 QB's we have on the roster at this time I would be much more comfortable with Huard as the backup to Hill (preferably with a rookie as the #3 and Smith gone to another team to find himself).

alex let alone any qb didn't have a chance with the way he was handled!

Personally, I think if it is tied, Alex Smith should start, because he has the higher upside. What really bothers me, though, was that missed incompletion in the first preseason game where he only had to throw the ball 5 yards, and missed the receiver. Throwing the ball to the checkdown receiver/screen should be a guaranteed completion, but Smith continually struggles with such a simple throw. Missing those throws really hurts an offense and often is the difference between a drive and a 3 and out. So long as Smith can't demonstrate that he can make that throw routinely, I think we have to give the nod to Hill, and that pains me greatly because I want Smith to be our QB.

if week 9 is where it starts for hill 07-08

def. rankings with W-L

vik- 20 w
det- 32 w
sea- 15 w
no- 26 l
gb- 11 l
sea- 15 l
ar- 17 l
den- 19 w

besides teams playing weaker and keeping certain people out, alex beat the cards hill didn't! the only team hill beat with a top 15 d was sea. hill did not do anything to win the starting job imo!

thanks joe. corrected

Originally posted by fan49:
if week 9 is where it starts for hill 07-08

def. rankings with W-L

vik- 20 w
det- 32 w
sea- 15 w
no- 26 l
gb- 11 l
sea- 15 w
ar- 17 l
den- 19 w

besides teams playing weaker and keeping certain people out, alex beat the cards hill didn't! the only team hill beat with a top 15 d was sea. hill did not do anything to win the starting job imo!

Hill didn't beat Seattle and Smith played the Cards when they were 8-8, matter of fact that's the only time he beat them. But right now comparing each others wins and losses is irrelevant since Hill has yet to start a full season.

My thing is simply this, start the guy who help contribute to our newly named HC and build off that win vs. Washington. And why not let Smith sit and learn A offense for the first time in his career without rushing him back into the fire.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by fan49:
if week 9 is where it starts for hill 07-08

def. rankings with W-L

vik- 20 w
det- 32 w
sea- 15 w
no- 26 l
gb- 11 l
sea- 15 w
ar- 17 l
den- 19 w

besides teams playing weaker and keeping certain people out, alex beat the cards hill didn't! the only team hill beat with a top 15 d was sea. hill did not do anything to win the starting job imo!

Hill didn't beat Seattle and Smith played the Cards when they were 8-8, matter of fact that's the only time he beat them. But right now comparing each others wins and losses is irrelevant since Hill has yet to start a full season.

My thing is simply this, start the guy who help contribute to our newly named HC and build off that win vs. Washington. And why not let Smith sit and learn A offense for the first time in his career without rushing him back into the fire.

i dont disagree with the latter. and i will root the same for hill as i would smith during the season. I would just love for smith to get the gig. so until the word is out go smith. but the defensive rankings i included i think do back up some opinions.

Originally posted by fan49:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by fan49:
if week 9 is where it starts for hill 07-08

def. rankings with W-L

vik- 20 w
det- 32 w
sea- 15 w
no- 26 l
gb- 11 l
sea- 15 w
ar- 17 l
den- 19 w

besides teams playing weaker and keeping certain people out, alex beat the cards hill didn't! the only team hill beat with a top 15 d was sea. hill did not do anything to win the starting job imo!

Hill didn't beat Seattle and Smith played the Cards when they were 8-8, matter of fact that's the only time he beat them. But right now comparing each others wins and losses is irrelevant since Hill has yet to start a full season.

My thing is simply this, start the guy who help contribute to our newly named HC and build off that win vs. Washington. And why not let Smith sit and learn A offense for the first time in his career without rushing him back into the fire.

i dont disagree with the latter. and i will root the same for hill as i would smith during the season. I would just love for smith to get the gig. so until the word is out go smith. but the defensive rankings i included i think do back up some opinions.

Where are you getting those rankings from and where did you get Hill beating the Seahawks from?