Originally posted by 49ersBest1:
Originally posted by TowelBoy:
Originally posted by 49ersBest1:
Results are what matter. The team doesn't have a true QB leader other than Hill. He gets the job done and the offense responds to his leadership and passion for the game. Once Hill starts falling on his face and causes this team to have a losing record all you haters can come out and complain. Until then, shut it.
"Results" is an ambiguous word. You could be referring to wins versus losses, but that's technically more of a team result than a strictly quarterback result. Maybe not in week 1, but I have a feeling you or I could have quarterbacked the Niners to the W today.
In terms of quarterback-specific indicators, Hill's "results" are exactly what I am taking issue with.
The results I like are Wins. If that means not turning over the ball and moving the chains, I don't care if he doesn't throws for 300+ yards and 3tds. Go be a Saints fan if you're so unhappy with our QB.
Not once have I said anything about wanting Hill's numbers to be more impressive.
I will attempt to use Brett Favre as an example. Now, I haven't had a chance to watch much of either Vikings game, so take this with a grain of salt. But from the looks of it, his numbers have been very conservative. Very few yards, three TDs, no picks in two victories. Not many shots down field either.
But I have a strong feeling that if I watched Favre play right now, I would note the conservativeness but I wouldn't see deficiencies general awareness and QB ability.
Being a "game manager who just wins" and a gunslinger who bombs for 300 yards are not polar opposites, and a great quarterback and belong to either group. Take Ben Roethlisberger. Gamer? Check. Strong arm? Check. Gaudy stats? Rarely. Wins? Yup.
Obviously, Big Ben is not available, nor is anyone like him. I am simply trying to think of a way to explain that it is possible to criticize Hill's QB play without it being his lack of yards that I am criticizing.