These wins are great, but

Originally posted by ninerfreak:

Originally posted by TowelBoy:
So three or four people have called me out for saying I'm not a football expert.

Is being a football expert a requirement for being a 49er fan or for posting on this board? Would it be better if I attempted to pass myself off as a football expert?

Look, guys, just trying to have a discussion here. Not looking to ruffle any feathers.

well you ruffle feathers with the word but....... winning just isn't enough for some people it seems...

The winning is outstanding. After 6 or so hours I just found myself thinking ahead to bigger things.

Originally posted by Daniel2778:
your name says it all, your just a towel boy, stop making rediculous threads

you're*... ridiculous*

Thanks for the input.

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

Originally posted by dublniklz:

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

You're absolutely right. I don't know what the front office is thinking. We need to trade for Peyton Manning, or Tom Brady, or Drew Brees right now. You say you're no football expert, but you're being way too humble. I think the 49ers should hire you right now.

This is why I brought up the two wins and how they impact our QB position. We've been sort of searching for "the guy" for several years now, and part of me hopes the front office isn't sitting around thinking "Shaun Hill is 2-0 this year and is still relatively young; let's not consider QB a need anymore."

I just don't think he's that caliber of QB.

Towelboy Maybe you should ask Jim Mora and Ken Whisenhunt just how crappy Shaun Hill played against them! I'll bet they DON'T share your same sentiments!

As far as the front office is concerned, I don't think they're STUPID enough to think that they have the quality QB the likes of a Joe Montana or a Tom Brady. Hill's job right now is just to MANAGE the game well enough to give them a chance to win, and that ... he's done!

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

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.

your argument is getting confusing, so what are you trying to say then?

like i said....



if it ain't broken, why fix it.

Originally posted by ninerfreak:


no reason to trade or replace the guy that's gone 9-3 with this team...if you're looking for an air attack be a fan of the patriots bill bellicheat loves to toss the long ball....this team is straight smash mouth football now...


if it ain't broken...why fix it.

The last thing I'm looking for is an "I told you so" moment. If we lose next week and Hill is the goat, I'm not going to be in here saying "see he sucks!"

In case you hadn't noticed already, I'm the one who doesn't subscribe to the view that one or two wins or losses are enough to determine if your QB is or isn't starter quality.

Originally posted by Kauaiguy:

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

Originally posted by dublniklz:

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

You're absolutely right. I don't know what the front office is thinking. We need to trade for Peyton Manning, or Tom Brady, or Drew Brees right now. You say you're no football expert, but you're being way too humble. I think the 49ers should hire you right now.

This is why I brought up the two wins and how they impact our QB position. We've been sort of searching for "the guy" for several years now, and part of me hopes the front office isn't sitting around thinking "Shaun Hill is 2-0 this year and is still relatively young; let's not consider QB a need anymore."

I just don't think he's that caliber of QB.

Towelboy Maybe you should ask Jim Mora and Ken Whisenhunt just how crappy Shaun Hill played against them! I'll bet they DON'T share your same sentiments!

You think they'd trade their guys for him straight up just because we beat them?

9-3

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

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.

I think you have a legit viewpoint...I just don't totally agree with it. I think if Hill is the type of player that gets better as he plays (both within a game and season). He made one glaring mistake to me today...not feeling the pressure and getting the sack/fumble. That's something he has to improve on. But as far as game awareness goes, I think that's one of his strong suits. Obviously he doesn't have the arm that other QBs have, but he has good timing. If you watch some highlights from last years games, you'll see him looking a lot more confident in his abilities (vs. Redskins, @ Dolphins, vs. Jets, @ Cowboys). I think he's going to return to that form as Jimmy Raye gets a better feel for the plays to call. I think his playcalling improved in this last game but at the same time, we didn't really have to totally open the playbook as far as passing goes because we had a 10 point 4th quarter lead for so long. Basically, I'm just saying give it a little more time.

this is a trick thread right? no answer is right......ASHTON KUTCHER where are you? we've been punk'd right?

Originally posted by ninerfreak:

your argument is getting confusing, so what are you trying to say then?

Let's see if I can clear it up.

Compared to, say, Peyton Manning, there are least two main areas where Hill comes up well short.

The first is in numbers. Many seem to think that is the deficiency I am attempting to highlight, though this is not the case.

The second is the eye test. How he throws, when he throws, the decisions he makes on a play-to-play basis, his awareness, etc.

These are the only reasons, not his numbers, why I believe Hill is a below average starter.

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

Originally posted by ninerfreak:

your argument is getting confusing, so what are you trying to say then?

Let's see if I can clear it up.

Compared to, say, Peyton Manning, there are least two main areas where Hill comes up well short.

The first is in numbers. Many seem to think that is the deficiency I am attempting to highlight, though this is not the case.

The second is the eye test. How he throws, when he throws, the decisions he makes on a play-to-play basis, his awareness, etc.

These are the only reasons, not his numbers, why I believe Hill is a below average starter.

i can name 30 other QB's that come up short to manning

so what is it you want? find a replacement asap for hill?

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

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.

I think you have a legit viewpoint...I just don't totally agree with it. I think if Hill is the type of player that gets better as he plays (both within a game and season). He made one glaring mistake to me today...not feeling the pressure and getting the sack/fumble. That's something he has to improve on. But as far as game awareness goes, I think that's one of his strong suits. Obviously he doesn't have the arm that other QBs have, but he has good timing. If you watch some highlights from last years games, you'll see him looking a lot more confident in his abilities (vs. Redskins, @ Dolphins, vs. Jets, @ Cowboys). I think he's going to return to that form as Jimmy Raye gets a better feel for the plays to call. I think his playcalling improved in this last game but at the same time, we didn't really have to totally open the playbook as far as passing goes because we had a 10 point 4th quarter lead for so long. Basically, I'm just saying give it a little more time.

Very nice post. Interesting theory about Hill. I've definitely noticed him picking up steam as a game goes on. Once again his best drive was in the 4th quarter. I am very excited to see how the season progresses. If Hill does, in fact, improve, we are a huge sleeper team.

Not to mention the Panthers are horrible.

Originally posted by TowelBoy:
So let me get this straight.

To everyone in this thread who has treated me like s*** for suggesting Hill is a below average quarterback:

Quote:
do you feel Hill can win us a championship?

That's really all I'm asking.

Even if the answer is no, I agree that doesn't necessitate we bench him tomorrow. Now that we have throttled our two main rivals, I am just expressing my concern that this team will be good enough to make the playoffs but not good enough to do any damage.

A lot of us are excited about our options in next year's draft. With two picks, we'll probably be in a position to make a move for a franchise quarterback. The only problem is that doesn't help us at all in this year's playoffs, plus I'm sick and tired of rooting for draft position.

I can't shake the feeling that almost every single team in the NFL has a better starting QB than we do. Sure, we're 2-0, but that doesn't mean we wouldn't also be 2-0 with Alex Smith or Nate Davis or Joey freaking Harrington behind center.

So, are there no QBs out there who could be had for a mid-round pick that would at least boost the potential potency of our offense? Any love for Derek Anderson out there now that the Quinn era has begun in Cleveland? Remember, he led the Browns to 10-6 a couple years ago. Does Kellen Clemens still have any potential now that Sanchez has been given the reigns in New York?

Other ideas?

If the 49ers win the NFC West/make the playoffs, it would be a huge accomplishment within itself, but to have expectations of the Niners making SB run this early in the season is highly unrealistic.

With the multiple positions that still need addressing, bringing in a has been FA QB and benching S Hill even though he hasnt had a bad or game altering performance would be a major distraction to the Offense. S Hill has practiced for weeks with the starters to suddenly throw a new signal caller in would likely be a disasterous approach and could cause players to question the reasoning behind the coaches desicions.

Why bench a player that not only isin't costing the team games? Hill is doing what is expected from him managing the game and not turning the ball over. The players from what i've read have really responded well to S Hill's command of the huddle, and have built a continuity from working together. Why distroy that rythem?

Good example The Cowgirls ran for well over 200 yards rushing just as the Niners did today, yet S Hill didn't throw 3 INTs and put his team in position to lose with sloppy undisapplined play.

Originally posted by ninerfreak:

Originally posted by TowelBoy:

Originally posted by ninerfreak:

your argument is getting confusing, so what are you trying to say then?

Let's see if I can clear it up.

Compared to, say, Peyton Manning, there are least two main areas where Hill comes up well short.

The first is in numbers. Many seem to think that is the deficiency I am attempting to highlight, though this is not the case.

The second is the eye test. How he throws, when he throws, the decisions he makes on a play-to-play basis, his awareness, etc.

These are the only reasons, not his numbers, why I believe Hill is a below average starter.

i can name 30 other QB's that come up short to manning

so what is it you want? find a replacement asap for hill?

Hah, you got me. I clarified my point, but I missed a step.

Now that we're clear it's the eye test and not the fantasy numbers I'm after, I should add that I don't just think he comes up a little short of Peyton Manning. I'm saying there are a lot of mediocre quarterbacks out there that I watch and think they could do more with Hill's weapons than Hill does.

Maybe I'm wrong. Who knows.