The Official Harbaugh Era QB competition!

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by NineFourNiner:

Originally posted by JayBee:
Just because I think a player who has been awful for 6 years will be awful in his 7th, that means I want the team to fail?

No, but when your desire to see a player, and thus likely the team, fail simply so that you can crow about how you "told you so" exceeds your desire to see the team succeed regardless of who is under center, that speaks volumes.

Which is more important to you? Team success with Smith or team failure so that you can be "right"?

You're right.

I'll just fall in line with the rest and bash Sing, Carr, Troy Smith, Crabtree, Rachal, etc...because fans who bash those guys and call them busts *cough* are hoping for team failure just so they can say "I told you so".

The golden boy is untouchable.

Just so we're clear...if Alex leads this team to a Super Bowl, I'll be elated...and I hope...for everyone's sake that he gets it together this year. I just think he won't. What makes my opinion less valid than yours?

Wow. You tend to overreact and go to extremes when you post. A side effect is the creation of strawmen arguments (see prior discussions). The "but they did it, too!!" argument also doesn't work.

I just asked a question. You have given an answer...sort of.

Your opinion is perfectly valid. I just happen to disagree with the factual premises underlying it and, often, the manner in which you express it.

Whatever dude. You're the guy who came up with the dumb notion that I would rather see the team lose with Alex than win with him just so I could stroke my own ego. How you pulled that out of my post was David Blane-esque.

Alex has been below average for 6 years of his career. Odds are he will be below average next year. If that makes me less of a fan then so be it...

I brought up Sing, Crabs, etc...because it seems to be acceptable to bash them...but not the golden boy.

Originally posted by WildBill:

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by Memphis9er:

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by BETTERDAYZ9ERS:
I've read this book every year for the last 5 years. The ending is still the same.

No it isn't. Nolan and Sing and their incompetent band of coaches are gone. THAT is what was here for 5 years with very little change.

If that is your position, then why waste the time and money to hire Harbaugh. If it was all about the quarterback, then Harbaugh is a waste. He won't be able to do any more with Kaep than Nolan/Sing did with Troy, Alex, Carr, Rattay, JTO, and friends.

Question...

During Nolan and Sing's reign....All the QB's that we have seen on this roster over 6 years. Were any of them quality players?

You can crap on Nolan and Sing as much as you want...but the QB's that were either signed, traded for or drafted have all been sub par. Bad coaching has nothing to do with it. If you're a poor QB, you're a poor QB.

Question to you...

Explain the case of Steve Young? He was God-awful until he had a good coach and better talent around him, why do you think that was?

You couldn't even answer my question.

As far as Steve Young....I'm NOT of the opinion that the difference between a poor QB and a good one is coaching. No frigging way.

Comparing Steve's 16 or so games on one of the worst NFL teams in history to Alex's 60 or so games is blasphemous and you should be ashamed of yourself.

I guess the difference between Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning was coaching, huh? Yall kill me.

With all due respect, it cuts both ways, it is like raising a kid, soem require no attention and are a parents dream, others take some work, still others are a lost cause. Steve was by no means natural. He had his moments, but it was like the taming of the shrew, the talent was there and he did show moments and flashes of a gamer which is more than Alex has, but he did need work and fell in the middle category. guys like Sammy Baugh, Marino and P Manning are naturals.

The one thing about Steve was he was a competitor. He was a born leader...from College to the pros. He wanted to play and believed in his abilities even though he had a rough start to his career. Yes, he even wanted to start ahead of arguably the greatest QB to ever play. Alex has none of that. Ask any QB....they'll tell you, the game is 90% mental. Watching Vernon have to tell Alex to fight for his job solidified what I thought about Alex. Nice guy...hell, he's a great guy....but he's not going to fight, he's not a natural leader and he never will be.

I'll agree though, he wasn't the most naturally gifted QB.

Originally posted by JayBee:

The one thing about Steve was he was a competitor. He was a born leader...from College to the pros. He wanted to play and believed in his abilities even though he had a rough start to his career. Alex has none of that.

Nonsense. Alex wouldn't keep his motivation and dedication so high (especially with this team and fan base) if he didn't believe in himself, want to start, and he is ready to compete with whoever they bring in.

Say what you want about his on-field abilities, but your quote there is just a load of BS.

....like clockwork.

Alex, CK7 and Josh Johnson -- That would be a fun QB competition to watch!

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL. Third worst in the league this year. But still able to produce.)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

Originally posted by JayBee:
....like clockwork.

Pot.

Kettle.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL this year but still able to produce)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

With Rivers, the 9ers would be a force in the NFC for many years to come.

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL this year but still able to produce)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

With Rivers, the 9ers would be a force in the NFC for many years to come.

Its like the Cardinals. They pick up Warner and all of a sudden they are in the Super Bowl.

Now?

Back to s**t like the 45 years before Warner.

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL this year but still able to produce)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

With Rivers, the 9ers would be a force in the NFC for many years to come.

Hypothetically speaking, yes.

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL this year but still able to produce)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

With Rivers, the 9ers would be a force in the NFC for many years to come.

Certain people must think that the 9ers suck so bad that Phillip Rivers cant even make a difference

Everyone else and their momma know we are just one good qb away from owning the west

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL this year but still able to produce)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

With Rivers, the 9ers would be a force in the NFC for many years to come.

That would be fun to see.

Hypothetically Speaking: What would we talking about if Alex Smith was no longer a Niner?

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by JayBee:


Plunkett is the one guy who got his career back on track out of 1000's of QB's who failed. What's your point?

Of course I see truth in circumstances...and I'm not black and white in my stance about Alex. I am a FAN who is sick and tired of the ineptitude at the QB position. I don't care how bad Alex has had it. I don't know how many times I have to say that he had a crappy situation and not all the blame is to be put on him. But, with that said, it's been 6 years, time to move on to someone ELSE! You're the type of person who likes to give people several chances, I'm the type of person who likes t cut his losses and move on. That's what most teams do in the NFL...and you pick Plunkett...a guy who bounced around the league and had a couple good seasons out of a 15 season career and didn't go to a single pro bowl. He won a couple pro bowls with a stacked team. Frankly, I don't want the next Jim Plunkett.

Meh

In almost every thread about Smith I have made a point of wanting the coaches to go out and find the best QBs they can. You claim I want to give Smith another chance...yeah, to compete for the job. If there is someone better great. Cut your losses and move on only works if you move on to something better, not just different.

Plunkett was the MVP of Super Bowl XV on that stacked team you mentioned. I would take a young Jim Plunkett. Or an Archie Manning (never), Fran Tarkenton (4th), Jim Kelly (5th), Dan Fouts (9th) or John Elway (11th) some QBs who are considered good to great who did not do well early in their careers. Some did very well later in their careers while some stayed on bad teams and did not.

What? Those guys played good despite some of the not so good seasons bro. The team sucked but the QBs you mentioned were good to great.

Frank Tarkenton:
By his 4th year he had 22TD and and 11 int with a 91.8 rating. This was in 64 where they went 8-5 that season and the QB and WR were killed by the D.

Jim Kelly:
This guy blew out of the gates his rookie year with 22 TD and 17 ints and a 86.5 rating.They finished 4-12 but you could tell he was legit his rookie year. He reminds be of Bradford.

Dan Foutes:
He did start out slow. But by his 6th season he was looking good.

John Elway:
He may not have the stats, but this guy was a winner and a gunslinger. When the chips were down, he led the team from behind and lifted them to victories. He led the Broncos to a 41-21 record his first 5 years.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by JayBee:

Originally posted by Young2Rice:

Originally posted by dj43:

If you truly believe all this team needs is Philip Rivers then I have lost a little respect for your credibility.

This offense needs a RG, a LT, a healthy LT, a TE that can read and adjust, WRs that can run good routes and get separation...and then we come to a defense that can't rush the passer or defend against the pass. Other than that, yes, this team could dominate.

Why lose credibility for me? Think about it for a second. Phillip Rivers was on a 9-7 team and had a phenomenal year. They missed the playoffs because the team sucked. DESPITE THE s**tTY TEAM EFFORT, Rivers was able to put up phenominal stats with his main WR gone most of the season, and his stud TE injured. Also, their OLINE was crap. If their TEAM was better, Rivers' QB play would have been worth a s**t. A.Smith barely puts up stats like this in his career...

Phillip Rivers 2010 Stats:
Comp: 65%
Yards: 4,710 (Smith has yet to hit 3,000 in any one season)
TD: 30 (Smith has 51 in 5 seasons. 6 including the injury season)
Int: 13 (Smith had 9 in the first 5 games)
Sacked: 38 (Bad OL this year but still able to produce)
Rating: 101.8 (Smith has yet to eclipse 85 in any given season)

So yeah. I do think the 49ers need Rivers. I think him and the 9ers would dominate the NFC west. I'll take his 30 tds and skills any day. Despite having no weapons on O for most of the year, and a bad Oline, he was able to produce and play well. His team went 9-7 because he willed them to some victories with sheer great QB play despite all the injuries, suspensions, and drama. And with no RB game to speak of.

So before you bash my cred, think about it.

With Rivers, the 9ers would be a force in the NFC for many years to come.

Certain people must think that the 9ers suck so bad that Phillip Rivers cant even make a difference

Everyone else and their momma know we are just one good qb away from owning the west

Nobody said he wouldn't make a difference. The point was that this team, based on the way multiple key players performed the past year, has numerous other problems that are holding it back besides who plays QB.