QB Competition

I'm not gonna attack you personally. But I don't really look into your posts as anything important when you comment on spelling in a FOOTBALL forum. It's funny the second you have facts thrown at you about Hill not being your saviour you go into child mode and whine. That's fine I'm sure your a nice guy but your not a football guy I can tell you that much. To the other real football fans out there looking forward to this weeks game and the on-going battle for the QB-competion I look forward to talking to you all and throwing stats and facts back and forth. And more then anything I look forward to watching the game this Saturday, maybe Hill will lose the girly throw and throw a tight spiral further then 10 yards but then again miracles don't always happen. Take Care all and on that note I must say I LOVE THE NINERS bye!

The Dallas game has got to provide the answer for us.

Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:

Originally posted by excelsior:
Kevin Lynch just did his "Partial Game Analysis." He may not know what he is talking about, but based on his play-by-play review of the QBs, he concluded that "While the recievers have potential, they are not getting separation ... they struggled against back-up corners."

If Lynch is correct, then the lack of productivity from our QBs may fall far more on our WR corp than on ordinary play from our QBs. Instead, they should both be praised for their results under the circumstances.

In fact, Smith may be blessed if he is not selected as the starting QB. He can watch Hill as he labors under difficult circumstances.

I thought about this as well. As much as i'm sure that Smith wants to badly start, it may be best for him to do a Shaun Hill and sit for half the season while continually getting accustomed to the playbook and the NFL.

This of course is assuming that Shaun Hill pulls a JTO which is probably not all that likely.

-9fA

I agree with this line of thinking for three reasons:

1. Hill was the starter last season and until either he shows last year was a flash-in-the-pan or Smith clearly outplays him, he SHOULD remain the starter.

2. Isaac Bruce will be the key to the passing game. He has a very good camp so far, indicating he still has enough gas in the tank to be productive and command the attention of the opponents best CB. That will make life much easier for Hill (or Smith) once the games begin for real. To date, Bruce has played so little that, though Lynch is correct, the WRs were not getting separation, the QBs have not had a full deck.

3. Starting Hill is best for Smith, and the fans. So while no coach should make a decision based on what us worthless fans think, it would be best to let Hill start. If Hill succeeds at the same level as last year, GREAT. If not, then Smith can come in without feeling the added pressure of having to outplay Hill.

I also think it is best for Smith that Hill start the season as he will have the chance to fully absorb the system before being asked to play.

My own observation was that Smith showed more of the poise and decision-making ability Saturday night than he has at any time in the past. Also, he hit Davis in stride on two throws that had not been that good in past years. I'm encouraged but not ready to sit Hill on the bench for all these reasons.

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by Thrash88:
Why? You don't like facts? Hill has not beat a good team in his career sorry to inform you but I'm not a Smith homer either they both have alot of work to do but for you to say Hill wasn't bad Saturday is a joke. Look into things before you run your mouth I know football and I can tell you Hill played the worst of the 3 qb's on Saturday HANDS DOWN.

Learn to use commas and periods. You lose a lot credibility when you can't use halfway decent grammar in your posts. Yes I'm attacking your grammar and not the content of your post.

As far as football goes, well, you don't really warrant a response. Have a good day.

Yah, I don't get the whole "Hill only beats bad teams" argument. As a team, we've sucked over the last 5 years, and even beating bad teams has been difficult for us, much less beating good teams.

Not to mention, he's only started 10 games in his whole career, so it's not like there's a huge sample size to draw from.

Seriously, you can't pick and choose who you play and what their records will be...you just go out and play the teams that are scheduled, and you either beat them or you don't. So far, as a starter, he's 7-3. Regardless of who he beat, that's 7 wins in his first 10 starts in the NFL.

Neither one of the QBs looked sharp. I have thought all along that Smith would have to clearly out play Hill to get the starting job, and Smith has defiantly not out played Hill.


End result… Hill starts start season and remains starter until he has a pretty bad game.

Ok I see your point and in a way I agree. But at the same time if you take into account a win being a win, does the preseason count as Nate Davis being better then them both because he had a good game against back ups. Because in reality that's what Hill did when he beat the Buccaneers correct? I will say 7-3 looks good on paper though no doubt just some times stats and records can be very deceiving.

Originally posted by valrod33:
i dont see how people are saying that Smith played like s**t, his recievers dropped 3 passes that should have been caught, the INT should have been caught and Bruce and Davis dropped 1 each on the first drive.

Im not saying Smith looked great but he didnt look as bad as everybody is saying either

Now im not saying Smith looked like Tom Brady out there, but he and Hill looked similar, i think Smith looked a little more poised in the pocket

I dont think either Hill or Smith seperated themselves, hopefully the Dallas game one of these guys outplays the other big time so we can end this crap and name a starter already

Im pro Alex but i have no problem if Hill wins the job, especially after the way he played last year

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:
Jesus, will all you Smith apologetics get REAL for once ? Is it sheer coincidence that EVERYTIME Smith is our QB, the "drops" and "miscues" by our receivers increase ? Did it ever occur to you people that Alex Smith is too slow in his reads, and that by the time he throws to his receivers, they're way past running their routes and are circling the field like chickens with their heads cut off. Yeah, if I ran a 5 yard outpattern, didnt have my QB throw to me......Id be running like a maniac too around all those defenders. Which would definitely skew my attention level to a point where I might not be concentrating on the ball too well.

Seriously, some of you guys need to wake up. Why dont you go back and pull out ALL your posts from Webzone archives that state "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball". It's freaking hilarious, cause this "problem" only exists with Smith in. And please, dont even bother to try and convince us realists that Alex Smith has an arm like Favre's, and his receivers cant see the ball.

The truth: Alex doesnt do a good job reading through his progressions. When he does, he throws a bad ball. When he doesnt, he forces his receivers into unconventional positions. No s**t they keep dropping balls.

Im not saying Hill is Montana reincarnate. But he sure as hell has better command of the field than Smith has. And Id rather put the ball in his hands on 3rd and 21, than give Smith a shot on 3rd and 5.

If Alex is slow in his progressions... and sometimes he is... that is no excuse for receivers to drop catchable passes. Ball comes your way? You catch it, or you sit the bench. The only thing rediculous is this desparation by some to discredit Alex Smith. There are things that he needs to do better... ball placement and decision making... but that will come with time and comfort behind center.

Bottom line is catchable passes get caught... or it's on the receivers. They make too much coin for this pampered belief that the ball must be put perfectly placed.

For the record, Smith was NOT slow in his progressions agains the Raiders. The first pass to Davis was his second option and he put it right in stride. The only "bad" throw was the one that went through Morgan's hands for a pick. Though that was a ball a quality receiver should have caught, it is one that will get a receiver hammered while doing so. From a technical standpoint, this was the best game we have seen from Smith.

But again, all of this stuff will be decided on the field. Everyone has their POV but the facts are that Smith has NEVER had a quality position coach and even Steve Young, whose comments were posted somewhat out of context, would agree that until a player is shown and told what to do by someone who knows what they are talking about, it is impossible for them to have the entire package.


....and now back to your regular programming...

In a general conclusion if Hill does start I hope he performs better then he did on Saturday or we won't win any games. Point is as fans we should want the team to succeed and we have to admit both quarterbacks don't look that great and in that case the start would go to Hill and HOPEFULLY he turns it on during the season because we do have a good running game and defense but that quarterback can be the wild card. If he keeps turnovers down and moves the chains on third downs we could be a black horse :)!

This entire QB competition has been a giant waste of time. Singletary should have named Shaun Hill the starter last offseason.

It's the second mistake he's made since being named head coach.

The first was replacing Mike Martz with Jimmy Raye.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:
Jesus, will all you Smith apologetics get REAL for once ? Is it sheer coincidence that EVERYTIME Smith is our QB, the "drops" and "miscues" by our receivers increase ? Did it ever occur to you people that Alex Smith is too slow in his reads, and that by the time he throws to his receivers, they're way past running their routes and are circling the field like chickens with their heads cut off. Yeah, if I ran a 5 yard outpattern, didnt have my QB throw to me......Id be running like a maniac too around all those defenders. Which would definitely skew my attention level to a point where I might not be concentrating on the ball too well.

Seriously, some of you guys need to wake up. Why dont you go back and pull out ALL your posts from Webzone archives that state "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball". It's freaking hilarious, cause this "problem" only exists with Smith in. And please, dont even bother to try and convince us realists that Alex Smith has an arm like Favre's, and his receivers cant see the ball.

The truth: Alex doesnt do a good job reading through his progressions. When he does, he throws a bad ball. When he doesnt, he forces his receivers into unconventional positions. No s**t they keep dropping balls.

Im not saying Hill is Montana reincarnate. But he sure as hell has better command of the field than Smith has. And Id rather put the ball in his hands on 3rd and 21, than give Smith a shot on 3rd and 5.

If Alex is slow in his progressions... and sometimes he is... that is no excuse for receivers to drop catchable passes. Ball comes your way? You catch it, or you sit the bench. The only thing rediculous is this desparation by some to discredit Alex Smith. There are things that he needs to do better... ball placement and decision making... but that will come with time and comfort behind center.

Bottom line is catchable passes get caught... or it's on the receivers. They make too much coin for this pampered belief that the ball must be put perfectly placed.

For the record, Smith was NOT slow in his progressions agains the Raiders. The first pass to Davis was his second option and he put it right in stride. The only "bad" throw was the one that went through Morgan's hands for a pick. Though that was a ball a quality receiver should have caught, it is one that will get a receiver hammered while doing so. From a technical standpoint, this was the best game we have seen from Smith.

But again, all of this stuff will be decided on the field. Everyone has their POV but the facts are that Smith has NEVER had a quality position coach and even Steve Young, whose comments were posted somewhat out of context, would agree that until a player is shown and told what to do by someone who knows what they are talking about, it is impossible for them to have the entire package.


....and now back to your regular programming...

He wasn't slow -- but he also wasn't hitting his primary routes -- even though replays showed he had the room.

Go back and look at his progressions. He was hitting the second and third "safe" option every single time. Dink and dunk. It was the same Alex Smith I've seen since Day One. He simply lacks the confidence to zing the ball downfield.

To be honest? Really honest? I think Hill is a stopgap measure at best. The best QB on the roster at this point appears to be Nate Davis.

But he's nowhere near ready. In a year or two? Mebbe. Now? No.

As billbird noticed, Smith often took the "safe" pass. What good does all that arm strength do if he won't use it? This may just be a confidence thing until he gets a little more settled. However, it was definitely an interesting observation...

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by oldman9er:

Originally posted by ZRF80:
Jesus, will all you Smith apologetics get REAL for once ? Is it sheer coincidence that EVERYTIME Smith is our QB, the "drops" and "miscues" by our receivers increase ? Did it ever occur to you people that Alex Smith is too slow in his reads, and that by the time he throws to his receivers, they're way past running their routes and are circling the field like chickens with their heads cut off. Yeah, if I ran a 5 yard outpattern, didnt have my QB throw to me......Id be running like a maniac too around all those defenders. Which would definitely skew my attention level to a point where I might not be concentrating on the ball too well.

Seriously, some of you guys need to wake up. Why dont you go back and pull out ALL your posts from Webzone archives that state "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball", "receivers dropped the ball". It's freaking hilarious, cause this "problem" only exists with Smith in. And please, dont even bother to try and convince us realists that Alex Smith has an arm like Favre's, and his receivers cant see the ball.

The truth: Alex doesnt do a good job reading through his progressions. When he does, he throws a bad ball. When he doesnt, he forces his receivers into unconventional positions. No s**t they keep dropping balls.

Im not saying Hill is Montana reincarnate. But he sure as hell has better command of the field than Smith has. And Id rather put the ball in his hands on 3rd and 21, than give Smith a shot on 3rd and 5.

If Alex is slow in his progressions... and sometimes he is... that is no excuse for receivers to drop catchable passes. Ball comes your way? You catch it, or you sit the bench. The only thing rediculous is this desparation by some to discredit Alex Smith. There are things that he needs to do better... ball placement and decision making... but that will come with time and comfort behind center.

Bottom line is catchable passes get caught... or it's on the receivers. They make too much coin for this pampered belief that the ball must be put perfectly placed.

For the record, Smith was NOT slow in his progressions agains the Raiders. The first pass to Davis was his second option and he put it right in stride. The only "bad" throw was the one that went through Morgan's hands for a pick. Though that was a ball a quality receiver should have caught, it is one that will get a receiver hammered while doing so. From a technical standpoint, this was the best game we have seen from Smith.

But again, all of this stuff will be decided on the field. Everyone has their POV but the facts are that Smith has NEVER had a quality position coach and even Steve Young, whose comments were posted somewhat out of context, would agree that until a player is shown and told what to do by someone who knows what they are talking about, it is impossible for them to have the entire package.


....and now back to your regular programming...

He wasn't slow -- but he also wasn't hitting his primary routes -- even though replays showed he had the room.

Go back and look at his progressions. He was hitting the second and third "safe" option every single time. Dink and dunk. It was the same Alex Smith I've seen since Day One. He simply lacks the confidence to zing the ball downfield.

To be honest? Really honest? I think Hill is a stopgap measure at best. The best QB on the roster at this point appears to be Nate Davis.

But he's nowhere near ready. In a year or two? Mebbe. Now? No.

A logical, unemotional post! I agree except that Hill is slightly better than a stopgap and I think, capable of getting us into the playoffs. how far? Who knows. As for this ridiculous competition, I'm a bit disappointed in Sing. If all things are equal, as they claim, then the job should go to Hill by default.
Yes, except for the drops (which were catchable, no matter if they were late or not), Smith made positive strides where Hill was mediocre at best. But, if this brought them "even", then just name Hill the starter and move on. If he falters, well then Smith's had the extra time to become more comfortable with the offense, which even his college coach says is imperative to his ultimate success. Why doesn't this make sense to so many of you? It just seems logical IMHO.

Originally posted by Thrash88:
In a general conclusion if Hill does start I hope he performs better then he did on Saturday or we won't win any games. Point is as fans we should want the team to succeed and we have to admit both quarterbacks don't look that great and in that case the start would go to Hill and HOPEFULLY he turns it on during the season because we do have a good running game and defense but that quarterback can be the wild card. If he keeps turnovers down and moves the chains on third downs we could be a black horse :)!

From the looks of how our offense is during the preseason, Shaun Hill will be a much better game manager. We'll be running the ball a lot so we don't necessarily have to worry about Hill throwing the ball often. I like how you bring in the stats and how Hill hasn't beaten good teams. The Bucs had almost all their defensive starters in the game that year. The Jets were still in the playoff hunt, the Redskins, on paper, were a much better team than us, and the Bills are a difficult team to beat on the road, especially with our success rate on the road. The fact of the matter is this, Hill doesn't need to throw 50-70 yards down the field to be a good QB. What he does well, is he doesn't make many mistakes, he makes quick reads, and he is pretty accurate. He moves the chains and puts points on the board. You say you know football, and so do I and a lot of people on this site. The only thing that matters is the WIN. Shaun Hill is a winner.

Originally posted by crzy:
This entire QB competition has been a giant waste of time. Singletary should have named Shaun Hill the starter last offseason.

It's the second mistake he's made since being named head coach.

The first was replacing Mike Martz with Jimmy Raye.[/quote]

Forgive me good sir but i disagree, and the reason why is that Martz system is not for our personel and he would forget about Frankie G and the running game. Every chance he got, he wanted to throw the ball.

Rememeber when we lost to Miami and there was 23 consecutive passes. He is not quite the Genius everyone made him out to be, but that's my belief.