-
Joecool
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 70,984
You guys are blind.
Average points per game with 5.5 games with Hill:
18.6
Average points per game with 6.5 games with Smith:
18.4
I included Alexs Houston half.
I still think Smith should start, but this spread B.S. is what it is, B.S., especially this
Double TE I am not going to run the ball offense is a Joke.
We need to get our best receivers out there.
And to think, we didn't have Crabs then and Gore was out for 3 games.
Blind I tell ya!
[ Edited by Joecool on Dec 11, 2009 at 13:11:19 ]
-
Joecool
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 70,984
Yeah, our defense really lost the Alex Smith games. This discussion is a joke as you guys make it seem like Alex lights it up for over 21 every game and Hill barely got 14.
-
BETTERDAYZ9ERS
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 3,078
Joe are you alright? I thought you were JoeCool?
we haven't lost 4 straight games since switching over to raye-gun...
-
Joecool
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 70,984
Originally posted by BETTERDAYZ9ERS:
Joe are you alright? I thought you were JoeCool?
Just don't ever point out Alex Smith's flaws or the flaws in this new offense.
-
WillistheWall
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 22,848
We should've have 30+ points vs Seattle had it not been for drops and fumbles. Smith has thrown 2.5 as many TDs as Hill, has 600+ more yards, has been sacked half as much in more games, and averages 70 more ypg. IIRC our OFFENSE also only averaged 14 PPG with Hill.
-
Joecool
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 70,984
Originally posted by el_hektor:
we haven't lost 4 straight games since switching over to raye-gun...
Whatever makes you feel better. Our opponents are scoring more because they are getting more possessions because of the "Raye Gun".
-
darkknight49
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 10,878
i think your math is a bit off, excluding the 21 defensive pts from the Rams game and the 7 pts from ST in Minn. All pts are from offensive scoring only.
Hill: 5.5 games
20 + 23 + 24 + 35 + 10 + 0 - 21 defensive pts - 7 ST pts = 84 pts
84/5.5 = 15.27 pts/game
Smith: 6.5 Games
21 + 14 + 27 + 10 + 24 + 20 + 17 = 133 pts
133/6.5 = 20.46 pts/game
Smith has not had the luxury of defensive and ST points. Those aspects of a team help make it complete. As we can see, this team is better offensively, but its not a complete team yet.
[ Edited by darkknight49 on Dec 11, 2009 at 15:52:59 ]
-
Joecool
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 70,984
Originally posted by darkknight49:
i think your math is a bit off, but the difference still isnt much.
Hill: 5.5 games
20 + 23 + 24 + 35 + 10 + 0 = 112
112/5.5 = 20.36 pts/game
Smith: 6.5 Games
21 + 14 + 27 + 10 + 24 + 20 + 17 = 133
133/6.5 = 20.46 pts/game
In that sense, the Offense has been fairly consistent. Why are we losing now: The other team is scoring more points than us. (gee, thats new).
The other team is scoring more points than us because there's a chance for them to get more possessions against a team that passes the ball 40 times stopping the clock. How many 10+ play drives do we have in this offense? I think Hill was good for a 10+ play drive in each of his first 3 games. It makes a huge difference when the opposition gets the ball less.
-
krizay
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 24,696
Did you take into account all of the defense and special team TD's Hill got?
-
lamontb
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 30,031
Only thing I know for sure is that this team is inconsistent with both qb's.
-
Overkill
- Moderator
-
- Posts: 10,801
Originally posted by darkknight49:
i think your math is a bit off, but the difference still isnt much.
Hill: 5.5 games
20 + 23 + 24 + 35 + 10 + 0 = 112 pts
112/5.5 = 20.36 pts/game
Smith: 6.5 Games
21 + 14 + 27 + 10 + 24 + 20 + 17 = 133 pts
133/6.5 = 20.46 pts/game
In that sense, the Offense has been fairly consistent. Why are we losing now: The other team is scoring more points than us (shocking, no?).
The defense scored 21pts in our first 5.5 games and ST scored 7, which means the offense under Hill actually only put up 84pts.
That's only 15.3 pts/game.
-
darkknight49
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 10,878
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by darkknight49:
i think your math is a bit off, but the difference still isnt much.
Hill: 5.5 games
20 + 23 + 24 + 35 + 10 + 0 = 112
112/5.5 = 20.36 pts/game
Smith: 6.5 Games
21 + 14 + 27 + 10 + 24 + 20 + 17 = 133
133/6.5 = 20.46 pts/game
In that sense, the Offense has been fairly consistent. Why are we losing now: The other team is scoring more points than us. (gee, thats new).
The other team is scoring more points than us because there's a chance for them to get more possessions against a team that passes the ball 40 times stopping the clock. How many 10+ play drives do we have in this offense? I think Hill was good for a 10+ play drive in each of his first 3 games. It makes a huge difference when the opposition gets the ball less.
yea, i liked those drives. ive been looking at the points allowed per game, and for the Hill games, the D gave up 21.6 pts per game, during smiths games the D gave up 17.5 pts per game.
-
darkknight49
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 10,878
Originally posted by Overkill:
Originally posted by darkknight49:
i think your math is a bit off, but the difference still isnt much.
Hill: 5.5 games
20 + 23 + 24 + 35 + 10 + 0 = 112 pts
112/5.5 = 20.36 pts/game
Smith: 6.5 Games
21 + 14 + 27 + 10 + 24 + 20 + 17 = 133 pts
133/6.5 = 20.46 pts/game
In that sense, the Offense has been fairly consistent. Why are we losing now: The other team is scoring more points than us (shocking, no?).
The defense scored 21pts in our first 5.5 games and ST scored 7, which means the offense under Hill actually only put up 84pts.
That's only 15.3 pts/game.
true, but that just makes things more complicated and you'd have to do that for the both sides then.
Has the D even scored points during Smith's run?
-
MaliCali
- Veteran
-
- Posts: 3,400
im pretty sure that 35 point beating, that the DEFENSE scored nearly most of against the lowly rams is skewing this average, quite a bit...why dont you get an average for what the offense was scoring...