49er Myths...fact or fiction

I've always believed Alex could play.

~ Terrible coaching.
~ New system every year.
~ New OC every year.
~ 2 season ending injuries.
~ Not being able to get the plays in on time...

Those are mostly what derailed him. And bad O Line play until this year when it finally appears better.

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:

Originally posted by boast:

Originally posted by ION2814:

Originally posted by jreff22:
KC will be destroyed this week, FACT.

Originally posted by redrathman:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Alex is inconsistent....FACT.

49ers turnover the ball in the Red Zone : FACT

Some people will always think Alex Smith sucks: FACT

Some people will always think Alex Smith is good QB: FACT

Some people will always think the Yorks are cheap: FACT

Some people love to complain: FACT

Some people are stubborn and irrational: FACT

jta, i think your point is that it is fact that some people will believe anything...but i am not sure...your point was a bit esoteric for me, unless you were just being cynical. My points were:

1. that there is, for the first time, a very good OL in front of alex, and for the truly first time everyone can see what the kid has...or hasn't. Based on going up against a very experienced, fast and tough--- just out of SB win--- NO Saints, alex did a yeoman's job, and also for 1st time in 5 yrs we had something by which to gauge him, ie a functioning, or more correctly, a really terrific OL. I gave alex my first grade ever for him and it was a strong A. Question is was this an aberration, or is this the new us? Looking at our past BM track record, everything would point to aberration...BUT, we now have a very, very good OL, and that is a world of difference between now and last 8 yrs.(yeah, Frank put up big numbers,1700 of them, one yr behind LA and JJglass, but that was a flash in the pan). The OL now is real, Solari is for real , and there are no flies on bigRay either. I think MJs contribution...and job description... is a lot more than most folks realize.

2. that for the first time since BM took over 18 mos ago, he put forth a coherent, very workable game plan, stuck to it, fixed the abominably slow to- get- in- play- calling, tried "ramming in down their throats unsuccessfully for 2 series, and then changed his spots, like a chamelion, and actually called a very good game. Sure, JR called the game(or did he?), and MJ was relaying plays in (or was he, in fact, calling them?), but whoever did what, it ended up an excellent game, in which we
a) beat the saints, and then b) beat ourselves in the end.

The a) part is obviously encouraging,

the b) part is part and parcel of coaching. My take on the coaching is they improved 300% over last game, and most of last yr,
(my bet being MJ is more responsible for this than anyone, but of course, i don't KNOW that), but then:

turned right around and proved that they had not calculated in nor instructed our PR how to field punts, (or where, or when),

they forgot to stress tuck the ball away in the red zone, Delanie,

and in spite of fixing delays in getting game plans in, sent the O onto the field with only 10 guys, vernon coming in late, and yet another unforced error with a delay of game penalty.

There were others, such as Goldson faceguarding Colston (instead of looking for ball) for a 20 yd catch on the saints winning drive,

manusky reverting to PREVENT D for one play and watching Colston get 20yds, then immediately switching back to aggressive D,

and who could forget baas's hike into the end zone.

So overall, coaching fixed many , serious, egregious problems, but still are culpable when it comes to the "little things" on which this game was lost. Put another way, coaching fixed the big things, then let the little things beat us.

It was a bittersweet win for us overall, and then we lost it.

THOSE are FACTS.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
jta, i think your point is that it is fact that some people will believe anything...but i am not sure...your point was a bit esoteric for me, unless you were just being cynical. My points were:

1. that there is, for the first time, a very good OL in front of alex, and for the truly first time everyone can see what the kid has...or hasn't. Based on going up against a very experienced, fast and tough--- just out of SB win--- NO Saints, alex did a yeoman's job, and also for 1st time in 5 yrs we had something by which to gauge him, ie a functioning, or more correctly, a really terrific OL. I gave alex my first grade ever for him and it was a strong A. Question is was this an aberration, or is this the new us? Looking at our past BM track record, everything would point to aberration...BUT, we now have a very, very good OL, and that is a world of difference between now and last 8 yrs.(yeah, Frank put up big numbers,1700 of them, one yr behind LA and JJglass, but that was a flash in the pan). The OL now is real, Solari is for real , and there are no flies on bigRay either. I think MJs contribution...and job description... is a lot more than most folks realize.

2. that for the first time since BM took over 18 mos ago, he put forth a coherent, very workable game plan, stuck to it, fixed the abominably slow to- get- in- play- calling, tried "ramming in down their throats unsuccessfully for 2 series, and then changed his spots, like a chamelion, and actually called a very good game. Sure, JR called the game(or did he?), and MJ was relaying plays in (or was he, in fact, calling them?), but whoever did what, it ended up an excellent game, in which we
a) beat the saints, and then b) beat ourselves in the end.

The a) part is obviously encouraging,

the b) part is part and parcel of coaching. My take on the coaching is they improved 300% over last game, and most of last yr,
(my bet being MJ is more responsible for this than anyone, but of course, i don't KNOW that), but then:

turned right around and proved that they had not calculated in nor instructed our PR how to field punts, (or where, or when),

they forgot to stress tuck the ball away in the red zone, Delanie,

and in spite of fixing delays in getting game plans in, sent the O onto the field with only 10 guys, vernon coming in late, and yet another unforced error with a delay of game penalty.

There were others, such as Goldson faceguarding Colston (instead of looking for ball) for a 20 yd catch on the saints winning drive,

manusky reverting to PREVENT D for one play and watching Colston get 20yds, then immediately switching back to aggressive D,

and who could forget baas's hike into the end zone.

So overall, coaching fixed many , serious, egregious problems, but still are culpable when it comes to the "little things" on which this game was lost. Put another way, coaching fixed the big things, then let the little things beat us.

It was a bittersweet win for us overall, and then we lost it.

THOSE are FACTS.

My post wasn’t really directed at you or your original post. In fact I agree with most of what you said. I made my post because it looked like your thread was in danger of being high jacked by an Alex Smith hater. There are some people in the Zone that have these absurd extreme positions that somehow weasel their way into every post. It drives me crazy! It seems like 40% of all threads turn into Alex Smith debates. Or how about countless threads somehow turn into “we could have had Deshawn Jackson.”

Chalk my prior post and this one up as me venting.

Thanks for clarification, and we are in agreement. I did miss your points...and they are valid.

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

1c.Alex can't call his own plays... Fiction. Except for dead ball time stoppage, he did call his own plays, and guess what? The kid who finished college in 2 &1/2 yrs , then took basket weaving and dance his last semester so he could play football, is obviously very able to call his own plays. There is a light year's worth of difference calling plays when you just have time to get to LOS and hike the ball, vs getting to LOS with 20 seconds to spare, giving him time to check off and audible...and the kid proved he is very adept at checking off, if given time to do so with plays in on timely fashion. I believe he has been so micromanaged by BM and JR, that he has not been able to show us what he has. Well, we know now.

This is the second time I've seen you post something about Alex calling his own plays - and that is FICTION. Where are you getting this info from? Wearing a wristband is not the same thing as calling your own plays.

Originally posted by FleckHandspoon:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

1c.Alex can't call his own plays... Fiction. Except for dead ball time stoppage, he did call his own plays, and guess what? The kid who finished college in 2 &1/2 yrs , then took basket weaving and dance his last semester so he could play football, is obviously very able to call his own plays. There is a light year's worth of difference calling plays when you just have time to get to LOS and hike the ball, vs getting to LOS with 20 seconds to spare, giving him time to check off and audible...and the kid proved he is very adept at checking off, if given time to do so with plays in on timely fashion. I believe he has been so micromanaged by BM and JR, that he has not been able to show us what he has. Well, we know now.

This is the second time I've seen you post something about Alex calling his own plays - and that is FICTION. Where are you getting this info from? Wearing a wristband is not the same thing as calling your own plays.

when we are in a 2 min drill and the clock is moving he calls his own plays, when clock stops calls are sent into him

Originally posted by jreff22:

Originally posted by FleckHandspoon:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:

1c.Alex can't call his own plays... Fiction. Except for dead ball time stoppage, he did call his own plays, and guess what? The kid who finished college in 2 &1/2 yrs , then took basket weaving and dance his last semester so he could play football, is obviously very able to call his own plays. There is a light year's worth of difference calling plays when you just have time to get to LOS and hike the ball, vs getting to LOS with 20 seconds to spare, giving him time to check off and audible...and the kid proved he is very adept at checking off, if given time to do so with plays in on timely fashion. I believe he has been so micromanaged by BM and JR, that he has not been able to show us what he has. Well, we know now.

This is the second time I've seen you post something about Alex calling his own plays - and that is FICTION. Where are you getting this info from? Wearing a wristband is not the same thing as calling your own plays.

when we are in a 2 min drill and the clock is moving he calls his own plays, when clock stops calls are sent into him

That was confirmed by Jaws and Gruden.

There are a lot of opinions in a fact thread

Originally posted by jta854:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
jta, i think your point is that it is fact that some people will believe anything...but i am not sure...your point was a bit esoteric for me, unless you were just being cynical. My points were:

1. that there is, for the first time, a very good OL in front of alex, and for the truly first time everyone can see what the kid has...or hasn't. Based on going up against a very experienced, fast and tough--- just out of SB win--- NO Saints, alex did a yeoman's job, and also for 1st time in 5 yrs we had something by which to gauge him, ie a functioning, or more correctly, a really terrific OL. I gave alex my first grade ever for him and it was a strong A. Question is was this an aberration, or is this the new us? Looking at our past BM track record, everything would point to aberration...BUT, we now have a very, very good OL, and that is a world of difference between now and last 8 yrs.(yeah, Frank put up big numbers,1700 of them, one yr behind LA and JJglass, but that was a flash in the pan). The OL now is real, Solari is for real , and there are no flies on bigRay either. I think MJs contribution...and job description... is a lot more than most folks realize.

2. that for the first time since BM took over 18 mos ago, he put forth a coherent, very workable game plan, stuck to it, fixed the abominably slow to- get- in- play- calling, tried "ramming in down their throats unsuccessfully for 2 series, and then changed his spots, like a chamelion, and actually called a very good game. Sure, JR called the game(or did he?), and MJ was relaying plays in (or was he, in fact, calling them?), but whoever did what, it ended up an excellent game, in which we
a) beat the saints, and then b) beat ourselves in the end.

The a) part is obviously encouraging,

the b) part is part and parcel of coaching. My take on the coaching is they improved 300% over last game, and most of last yr,
(my bet being MJ is more responsible for this than anyone, but of course, i don't KNOW that), but then:

turned right around and proved that they had not calculated in nor instructed our PR how to field punts, (or where, or when),

they forgot to stress tuck the ball away in the red zone, Delanie,

and in spite of fixing delays in getting game plans in, sent the O onto the field with only 10 guys, vernon coming in late, and yet another unforced error with a delay of game penalty.

There were others, such as Goldson faceguarding Colston (instead of looking for ball) for a 20 yd catch on the saints winning drive,

manusky reverting to PREVENT D for one play and watching Colston get 20yds, then immediately switching back to aggressive D,

and who could forget baas's hike into the end zone.

So overall, coaching fixed many , serious, egregious problems, but still are culpable when it comes to the "little things" on which this game was lost. Put another way, coaching fixed the big things, then let the little things beat us.

It was a bittersweet win for us overall, and then we lost it.

THOSE are FACTS.

My post wasn’t really directed at you or your original post. In fact I agree with most of what you said. I made my post because it looked like your thread was in danger of being high jacked by an Alex Smith hater. There are some people in the Zone that have these absurd extreme positions that somehow weasel their way into every post. It drives me crazy! It seems like 40% of all threads turn into Alex Smith debates. Or how about countless threads somehow turn into “we could have had Deshawn Jackson.”

Chalk my prior post and this one up as me venting.

You do realize that those of us who you view as "people who have these absurd extreme positions" view your position as absurd and extreme as well too right?? How can you come out and throw "Facts" around after only 1 successful game, especially after a horrible performance just the week prior?

I agree that Alex showed flashes of being a good QB on Monday night, but we have already seen that before. I think everyone in 9er country is aware of that. Where we begin to disagree is where we begin to discuss how good his teammates, coaching staff, play calling, etc. around him have to be in order for him to have a good game. It is impossible to have all-pros at every position around him year in and year out. I believe a QB needs to be able to make art out of dog s**t on a black canvas if that's all he's given to work with. Maybe not every game, but most of the time. The moons shouldn't all have to align perfectly in order for him to have a good game.

Its now year 6 and Smith still showed some of his basic old habits! If our Defense hadn't played tremendously well we wouldn't have even been in the game and it would have been another blowout.

As to anti or pro-Smith comments... These seem like some great points by non anti-Smith fans. Are they absurd?

Originally posted by kem99:
That's a lot of opinions but here's the thing...can you really draw any more "fact or fiction" conclusions from last night's game than you can from the first game? In either case, its just one game of data. To really evaluate your "49er myths", you need more game data before drawing conclusions.

I think you can say that for stretches of time, the 49ers are capable of being the superior team on the field. They did that for the first quarter and half against Seattle. They did that for different stretches of time against the Saints.

We can also say that the 49ers ability to control the game has been compromised by their tendency to fall victim to self-inflicted wounds. In Seattle, it was the failures in the red zone...missing Norris on the 4th and goal, getting the plays in late, taking the delay of game penalty on the second 4th and goal. Against the Saints, it was the botched shotgun snap that led to a safety, Walker's fumble in the redzone that cost them at least 3 points, Adams' muff of the punt, having to take a delay of game penalty coming out of a TV time out because Davis was late getting on the field.

We can also say that the 49ers are a different team on the road than they are at home. We saw that last year and certainly so far this year.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
This is the thing, Smith always looks good or decent at home, but when hes on the road, hes like a little lost kid out there. Remember the last time he played in KC we were shut out 41-0, KC is a tough place to play in.

And s much as I'd love to be on the bandwagon, every time I get excited about him he shows his inconsistencies. So I've made it a point to just stay off the BW and see how this season plays out.

I'm a fan, just not a blind one, and no I don't think everything is his fault.

Originally posted by Norcal9erfan:

Originally posted by jta854:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
jta, i think your point is that it is fact that some people will believe anything...but i am not sure...your point was a bit esoteric for me, unless you were just being cynical. My points were:

1. that there is, for the first time, a very good OL in front of alex, and for the truly first time everyone can see what the kid has...or hasn't. Based on going up against a very experienced, fast and tough--- just out of SB win--- NO Saints, alex did a yeoman's job, and also for 1st time in 5 yrs we had something by which to gauge him, ie a functioning, or more correctly, a really terrific OL. I gave alex my first grade ever for him and it was a strong A. Question is was this an aberration, or is this the new us? Looking at our past BM track record, everything would point to aberration...BUT, we now have a very, very good OL, and that is a world of difference between now and last 8 yrs.(yeah, Frank put up big numbers,1700 of them, one yr behind LA and JJglass, but that was a flash in the pan). The OL now is real, Solari is for real , and there are no flies on bigRay either. I think MJs contribution...and job description... is a lot more than most folks realize.

2. that for the first time since BM took over 18 mos ago, he put forth a coherent, very workable game plan, stuck to it, fixed the abominably slow to- get- in- play- calling, tried "ramming in down their throats unsuccessfully for 2 series, and then changed his spots, like a chamelion, and actually called a very good game. Sure, JR called the game(or did he?), and MJ was relaying plays in (or was he, in fact, calling them?), but whoever did what, it ended up an excellent game, in which we
a) beat the saints, and then b) beat ourselves in the end.

The a) part is obviously encouraging,

the b) part is part and parcel of coaching. My take on the coaching is they improved 300% over last game, and most of last yr,
(my bet being MJ is more responsible for this than anyone, but of course, i don't KNOW that), but then:

turned right around and proved that they had not calculated in nor instructed our PR how to field punts, (or where, or when),

they forgot to stress tuck the ball away in the red zone, Delanie,

and in spite of fixing delays in getting game plans in, sent the O onto the field with only 10 guys, vernon coming in late, and yet another unforced error with a delay of game penalty.

There were others, such as Goldson faceguarding Colston (instead of looking for ball) for a 20 yd catch on the saints winning drive,

manusky reverting to PREVENT D for one play and watching Colston get 20yds, then immediately switching back to aggressive D,

and who could forget baas's hike into the end zone.

So overall, coaching fixed many , serious, egregious problems, but still are culpable when it comes to the "little things" on which this game was lost. Put another way, coaching fixed the big things, then let the little things beat us.

It was a bittersweet win for us overall, and then we lost it.

THOSE are FACTS.

My post wasn’t really directed at you or your original post. In fact I agree with most of what you said. I made my post because it looked like your thread was in danger of being high jacked by an Alex Smith hater. There are some people in the Zone that have these absurd extreme positions that somehow weasel their way into every post. It drives me crazy! It seems like 40% of all threads turn into Alex Smith debates. Or how about countless threads somehow turn into “we could have had Deshawn Jackson.”

Chalk my prior post and this one up as me venting.

You do realize that those of us who you view as "people who have these absurd extreme positions" view your position as absurd and extreme as well too right?? How can you come out and throw "Facts" around after only 1 successful game, especially after a horrible performance just the week prior?

I agree that Alex showed flashes of being a good QB on Monday night, but we have already seen that before. I think everyone in 9er country is aware of that. Where we begin to disagree is where we begin to discuss how good his teammates, coaching staff, play calling, etc. around him have to be in order for him to have a good game. It is impossible to have all-pros at every position around him year in and year out. I believe a QB needs to be able to make art out of dog s**t on a black canvas if that's all he's given to work with. Maybe not every game, but most of the time. The moons shouldn't all have to align perfectly in order for him to have a good game.

Its now year 6 and Smith still showed some of his basic old habits! If our Defense hadn't played tremendously well we wouldn't have even been in the game and it would have been another blowout.

As to anti or pro-Smith comments... These seem like some great points by non anti-Smith fans. Are they absurd?

Originally posted by kem99:
That's a lot of opinions but here's the thing...can you really draw any more "fact or fiction" conclusions from last night's game than you can from the first game? In either case, its just one game of data. To really evaluate your "49er myths", you need more game data before drawing conclusions.

I think you can say that for stretches of time, the 49ers are capable of being the superior team on the field. They did that for the first quarter and half against Seattle. They did that for different stretches of time against the Saints.

We can also say that the 49ers ability to control the game has been compromised by their tendency to fall victim to self-inflicted wounds. In Seattle, it was the failures in the red zone...missing Norris on the 4th and goal, getting the plays in late, taking the delay of game penalty on the second 4th and goal. Against the Saints, it was the botched shotgun snap that led to a safety, Walker's fumble in the redzone that cost them at least 3 points, Adams' muff of the punt, having to take a delay of game penalty coming out of a TV time out because Davis was late getting on the field.

We can also say that the 49ers are a different team on the road than they are at home. We saw that last year and certainly so far this year.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
This is the thing, Smith always looks good or decent at home, but when hes on the road, hes like a little lost kid out there. Remember the last time he played in KC we were shut out 41-0, KC is a tough place to play in.

And s much as I'd love to be on the bandwagon, every time I get excited about him he shows his inconsistencies. So I've made it a point to just stay off the BW and see how this season plays out.

I'm a fan, just not a blind one, and no I don't think everything is his fault.

What position of mine do you think is extreme? I never said how I feel one way or the other. This is what is absurd; you assuming that I’m in the “Alex Smith is great clan” just because I attack the “Alex Smith sucks clan.” I think that both of those positions are stupid. If you care, my opinion falls in the middle of those two arguments. If you think that is “absurd” so be it, but it’s clearly not extreme.

This forum is here so people can post there opinions, I get that. Some people’s opinions are good, and some are stupid.

Here is what it comes down to: If there is nothing out there that would change your opinion, that is just plain dumb.

Case in point- Some people think the Yorks are cheap. In the beginning they were cheap, that was a perfectly reasonable opinion. Since then they have gone out and paid top dollar to get the big fish free agents (N. Clements, J. Smith). They have also given contract extensions to players they could have just let play out their contracts (Snyder, T. Brown). Yet there are still people on this board that think the Yorks are cheap! They may not be Daniel Snyder, but they are NOT cheap.

Some people are the same way with Alex Smith. If he has a great year they will still find something to support their argument that he is terrible. If he has a terrible year, others will roll out countless excuses as to why he needs one more year.

It’s those people that aggravate me.

Originally posted by jta854:

Originally posted by pasodoc9er:
jta, i think your point is that it is fact that some people will believe anything...but i am not sure...your point was a bit esoteric for me, unless you were just being cynical. My points were:

1. that there is, for the first time, a very good OL in front of alex, and for the truly first time everyone can see what the kid has...or hasn't. Based on going up against a very experienced, fast and tough--- just out of SB win--- NO Saints, alex did a yeoman's job, and also for 1st time in 5 yrs we had something by which to gauge him, ie a functioning, or more correctly, a really terrific OL. I gave alex my first grade ever for him and it was a strong A. Question is was this an aberration, or is this the new us? Looking at our past BM track record, everything would point to aberration...BUT, we now have a very, very good OL, and that is a world of difference between now and last 8 yrs.(yeah, Frank put up big numbers,1700 of them, one yr behind LA and JJglass, but that was a flash in the pan). The OL now is real, Solari is for real , and there are no flies on bigRay either. I think MJs contribution...and job description... is a lot more than most folks realize.

2. that for the first time since BM took over 18 mos ago, he put forth a coherent, very workable game plan, stuck to it, fixed the abominably slow to- get- in- play- calling, tried "ramming in down their throats unsuccessfully for 2 series, and then changed his spots, like a chamelion, and actually called a very good game. Sure, JR called the game(or did he?), and MJ was relaying plays in (or was he, in fact, calling them?), but whoever did what, it ended up an excellent game, in which we
a) beat the saints, and then b) beat ourselves in the end.

The a) part is obviously encouraging,

the b) part is part and parcel of coaching. My take on the coaching is they improved 300% over last game, and most of last yr,
(my bet being MJ is more responsible for this than anyone, but of course, i don't KNOW that), but then:

turned right around and proved that they had not calculated in nor instructed our PR how to field punts, (or where, or when),

they forgot to stress tuck the ball away in the red zone, Delanie,

and in spite of fixing delays in getting game plans in, sent the O onto the field with only 10 guys, vernon coming in late, and yet another unforced error with a delay of game penalty.

There were others, such as Goldson faceguarding Colston (instead of looking for ball) for a 20 yd catch on the saints winning drive,

manusky reverting to PREVENT D for one play and watching Colston get 20yds, then immediately switching back to aggressive D,

and who could forget baas's hike into the end zone.

So overall, coaching fixed many , serious, egregious problems, but still are culpable when it comes to the "little things" on which this game was lost. Put another way, coaching fixed the big things, then let the little things beat us.

It was a bittersweet win for us overall, and then we lost it.

THOSE are FACTS.

My post wasn’t really directed at you or your original post. In fact I agree with most of what you said. I made my post because it looked like your thread was in danger of being high jacked by an Alex Smith hater. There are some people in the Zone that have these absurd extreme positions that somehow weasel their way into every post. It drives me crazy! It seems like 40% of all threads turn into Alex Smith debates. Or how about countless threads somehow turn into “we could have had Deshawn Jackson.”

Chalk my prior post and this one up as me venting.

HAHA! check out the "Is Chilo Rachal a bust?" thread post 15 & 16