Shaun Hill named starter for MNF @ Arizona Cardinals
Shaun Hill has officially been named the starting quarterback for the Monday Night game two weeks from tonight against the Arizona Cardinals. What I think is most interesting about this is that this will give Hill the opportunity to work with the first team offense for the first time since I think the first or second week of training camp. I'm curious to see what he can do with a couple weeks work with the #1s.
I'm not surprised by this decision, but at the same time I would not have been surprised if Martz did what he could to talk Singletary into sticking with J.T. O'Sullivan. I stuck up for JTO early on but am certainly willing to admit I was somewhat wrong. I think Hill's quick, decisive release can make up for a poor offensive line. That should mean fewer turnovers and more points. And with our defense, the more points the better.
55 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I like the point..
that Singletary made when talking about arm power. Montana did not have a very powerful arm but managed the game and won with his arm at the same time. Hill isn’t Montana but the point is he doesn’t have to have a powerful arm like JTO. Glad Hill is going to be the starter. Don’t know if he’ll win games but he should bring the turnover stat down.
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
i think...
…the change to hill might have a couple of positive indirect effects on the niners performance.
(1) he gets the ball out quickly, so fewer sacks and fewer hold-the-ball-so-long-that-a-rusher-can-come-out-of-nowhere-to-knock-it-out-of-your-hand fumbles.
(2) because of hill’s lack of arm strength, martz has to simplify the playbook to focus on short passes and running, which plays right into the strengths of the offensive personnel (running back, run blocking, YAC-prone TEs).
(3) because of (2), the offense will be on the field more, which means the swiss cheese defense will be on the field less.
granted these are all pretty obvious ways to analyze the impact of the change, but i guess the point i’m making is that i won’t be expecting gaudier (is that a word?) passing numbers or higher point totals. on the contrary, i expect to see more 23-17 type niner wins and losses than 34-13 niner losses. like iron mike reduxe says, hill is a better fit for the state of the 49ers’ personnel, strengths, and weaknesses.
by (Florida) Danny Tuccitto on Oct 27, 2008 7:19 PM PDT reply actions
what a shit show
sorry kids but the only thing about the NFL I can get excited for right now is the prediction game
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
Looks like you’ll have to wait another day, too!
Because I’m sleepy.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Oct 27, 2008 11:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I like the move
And I like Shaun Hill. I haven’t been campaigning for him to start this year because I was unsure about how he’d fit into Martz’s system, but I really like him as a QB.
If Martz can set aside the 7-step drops and deep-ins for a couple weeks and run with Hill’s strengths (and that is the big if, we could see a much-improved offense. We’ve had problems closing out games a couple times this year, and that’s one thing that I think Shaun Hill will be able to do tremendously more effectively going forward (that is, assuming our defense allows us to actually SUSTAIN a lead sometime in the next several weeks).
I’m hoping that not having JTO out there means Martz won’t feel obligated to roll the dice so often. While I think Hill is the better QB, it’s clear that JTO had the better tools for the system. But then…perhaps what this offense needs is a guy under center that Martz isn’t so astronomically high on – less confidence means less ball handling, which results in more Frank Gore carries. If you ask me, I’d say that’s a win/win.
My only question: what’s the status of Delanie Walker? Hill had chemistry with him in his games late last year, and DW has developed into one of the more consistent receiving threats this year when allowed to play that role.
If Martz can set aside the 7-step drops and deep-ins for a couple weeks and run with Hill’s strengths (and that is the big if, we could see a much-improved offense.
I don’t know if that’s such a great idea. I know that you probably don’t mean it literally, but it’s still a point of concern. Hill’s lack of arm strength could (eventually) play against the 49ers. If he fails to succeed on completing the more intermediate depth routes, defense can once again start to cue in on Gore, because the safeties won’t have to play as deep (none of the 49ers’ WRs are really burners).
I know his arm can’t be THAT weak as to where he can’t throw those deep ins and posts. He may be able to succeed the first week or two with shorter passes (slants, comebacks, shallow in and outs and various check downs to RBs and TEs), but he will need to show those deeper passes if the 49ers want to consistently succeed beyond that.
He can't throw intermediate passes?
I thought it was just the deep ball he struggled with.
Trent Kline: Decentish. Also, my website is called ChatterBalks Dot Com. It's not being updated right now. Hope for more at your own risk.
I'm not 100% certain
I’m not 100% about his arm strength and all that. From what I gather, people seem to believe he can’t throw those kinds of routes, so I’m kind of going off that (in a speculative manner). If he can indeed throw the intermediate routes, I haven’t seen a whole lot of it from him, to be honest.
I’ve never pretended to be a quarterback by any means, and really no nothing about their mechanics, but I do wonder about accuracy and arm strength. I know arm strength doesn’t just plain drop off at some magical number. I know that a QB can vary in how far he can throw the ball depending on his mechanics at that particular instance in time. I also know that accuracy doesn’t just fall off at some magical number either. So say Hill can’t throw a 40 yard pass, how is his accuracy on a 20 to 25 yard deep-in route? I’m guessing it’s no where near as accurate as a 10 yard in. So the question is, how good is Hill at throwing those 10 to 20 yard patterns? I guess we’ll find out soon enough.
Depending on if they come out early…Tim Tebow, Chase Daniels (he’s said he would stay, but…), Colt McCoy (look at his stats against Okie State…amazing), Sam Bradford. All top 10 teams (except Mizzou) with high-powered offenses. Certainly there’s a few more lurking. This could be a huge QB year in the draft.
fail
tebow is not considered an NFL prospect, and if you look at the early big board, most people don’t have a QB in their top 15. There are some decent looking college QBs but some of them might not come out (mccoy), some are “system” qb’s (the guy from texas tech), some are too short (Daniel), and some are not thought to be NFL QB’s (tebow).
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
If Tebow isn't considered a QB prospect then Reggie Bush shouldn't have been considered a RB prospect
Somebody will take a shot on Tebow just based on his physical tools and high ceiling.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions
remember
he plays in the same offense that produced Alex Smith, and he’s less of a passer and more of a runner than Smith
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
Partially true
It is Urban Meyer’s offense but don’t compare the Mountain West to the SEC. I also wouldn’t say that it’s cut and dry that Smith was more of a passer.
Smith ’04 – 2952 passing yards, 32 passing TD, 4 INT, 631 rushing yards, 10 rushing TD
Tebow ’07 – 3286 passing yards, 32 passing TD, 6 INT, 895 rushing yards, 23 rushing TD
If Smith got drafted as the #1 pick Tebow will get drafted as a QB.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions
good point
I was just going on the impression I had. From what I had heard Tebow was not considered a big prospect, but maybe he will be, he certainly has some nice looking stats
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
I think Tebow’s passing ability is a little underrated. But I do think that Tebow can be an affective NFL QB if he is used properly and that’s the caveat. It’s like how Atlanta tried to prolong Vick’s career by turning him into more of a pocket passer. It’s my opinion that Vick, off-field issues aside, could have been a lot more productive if Atlanta had just taken his lease off and let him be Michael Vick. Sure he would have taken a lot of hits but he would have made a lot of big time plays. Which ultimately would have shortened his carrer drasticaly. I for one, would have taken 5 years of balls-to-the-wall-scrambling-making-defenses-look-silly Michael Vick over 10 years of drop-back-try-to-be-a-pocket-passer Michael Vick.
It’s up to the offensive coordinators to play to the strengths of their players. That why you don’t Reggie Bush lining up at tailback and getting 25 carries a game. I believe Tebow can be a productive QB in the NFL but you can’t hand cuff him by making sit in the pocket.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 12:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Haven't you guys seen what the Dolphin's have been doing with the Wild Cat offense?
Offense’s are ever evolving. Good OC can take top end talent, see Reggie Bush, and build the offense around them. Now if that means using Tebow is come other capacity than a drop back QB then so be it but he’ll get drafted and he’ll throw the ball.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions
ok maybe I'm wrong
scout.com has tebow as the top QB nfl prospect but that’s the FIRST I’ve heard of him being considered for the NFL
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
this list doesn’t even have Tebow on it, but then again it lists Longshore ahead of Tuitama so I don’t trust it
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
That's a preseason list
All of those top 5 guys have taken huge hits in their stocks.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
I was wondering
if that might be from preseason, I didn’t read it carefully
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
scout inc on ESPN
has it Bradford, Stafford, Sanchez. Mel Kiper doesn’t have a QB in his top 25, and here’s his top 5 by position for QBs:
1. Curtis Painter, Purdue
2. Hunter Cantwell, Louisville
3. Rhett Bomar, Sam Houston St.
4. Nathan Brown, Central Arkansas
5. Tom Brandstater, Fresno St.
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
That's got to be an old list
I find it extremely difficult to believe that Painter and Cantwell are the top QB’s right now.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Tebow runs the spread which put a lot of negatives on him
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
Daniels isn't going to be one of the top guys
He’s got the numbers because of his offense but, for right or wrong, he’s too short to be considered one of the top guys.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:45 AM PDT up reply actions
The HOF has...
…a few QB’s at 6’, 6’1" and 5’11". the closest “Modern” QB in this category is Tarkenton. Most were 6’2" or above. Not making Daniels’ out to be an HOFer, but if a guy can play, height isn’t that big a deal. How many 6’5" 225 lb stiffs have come and gone?
What's your point?
Did I not say “for right or wrong”? I never said he couldn’t be a good NFL QB. But the fact remains that he’s going to slide because he isn’t tall enough. That’s just the way it is.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions
My point?
I agree he will likely slide. I’m sick and tired of drafting guys who fit some predetermined limits. If a QB can lead men and make good decisions, I don’t care if he’s 6’ or 6’5". BY was 6’ and 295, but one of the greatest NT’s in the game. Zach Thomas wasn’t a prototype. Jim Zorn? Draft smart, not predictable.
Fired the fact-checker...
Just can’t get good help these days. 6’3" and played all over the line. Usually lined up over center and guard.
What makes Chase Daniels better than Colt Brennan?
There is 1 6’0" starting QB in the league right now. 2 6’1" starting QB’s. The 29 others are 6’2"+. The odds appear to be against the 6’0" QB’s. Last time I checked a DT doesn’t have to look over OL to find WR’s, therefore height is much less of a concern for DT than QB. Thomas is an anomaly. You don’t draft smart by looking for anomalies.
Chase is short and he’s plays in a non-NFL type offense and both of those points are going to hurt his draft stock.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions
Can't really say Colt wouldn't have matched Chase's production.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I was referring to the difference between their status as prospects.
One guy put up his numbers with Missou.
One guy put up his numbers in the WAC.
Fair enough
and that’s the reason why Colt was a 6th round pick and Chase will probably be a 3rd/4th-ish round pick. You can’t argue either one’s production but ultimately it’s their size, or lack their of, that’ll drop them on draft boards.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
If they were in the same system playing with the same talent against the same competition. They both put up some gawdy numbers but ultimately Colt’s diminative size caused him to slide.
I get that level of competition plays a role but size can easily trump it. Look at Joe Flacco, he played 1AA football at Delaware but he’s 6’6.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Don’t know if Chase is better than Colt. Gotta gree that his success has come against high-quality opponents, though.
Gotta disagree on not looking for anomalies. Seen many Heisman trophy winners succeed in the NFL? How about all of the Butkus-busts, and nimrods who can run a 4.3 40 yard dashes, can bench 300 lbs 25 times straight, and loves weed/strippers/etc. more than the game itself? Those are the doofs that get drooled over, get $16 million signing bonuses, and cost coaches and gm’s their jobs. Look for the guys who can play at any level. Sure there’s safe picks like Patrick Willis, but way too many whiffs in the top 10.
I don't understand.
I don’t understand your stance. Are you saying teams SHOULD look at anomalies? If so, I don’t agree with the argument that follows it.
I happen to think that a lot of Heisman players ARE anomalies. I also happen to think guys that have ridiculous combine results are anomalies. If you’re considering anomalies, shouldn’t these guys be included under that umbrella as well? I do, but apparently you don’t, as you blast them.
College scouting isn’t black and white, and teams that draft that way are of course, doomed to fail. You can’t just depend on measurables, just like you can’t just depend on statistics either. If measurables were all that mattered, Vernon Davis would be the best tight end in football right now. If statistics and/or results were all that mattered, Ken Dorsey would be one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL right now and Mike Rumph would be a shut down corner that no one scores on.
Because of all that, the draft is a pretty big crap shoot. No team has the perfect formula/blend of measurables/stats that will yield them a hit everytime. Don’t get me wrong, there are some sure bets, but the majority of the players are potential wiffs.
I’m not saying you shouldn’t go after anomalies, but you shouldn’t discount method’s opinion that going with what works has a higher success rate. He’s not saying 6’0" QBs can’t succeed, it’s just that there aren’t many of them. Why would a team take that chance if presented with someone who better fits the mold? I don’t know about you, but have you tried looking past people who are 6’3" through 6’6" and weigh 300 pounds at a minimum? This is not to mention the guys lining up across the way who are about just as big but also throw hands up?
I don’t know college football all that well, so I can’t comment on these two players specifically, but if I was an NFL scout, I would definitely like the 6’2" guy more if all else seems pretty similar. This is especially true if that 6’ guy has played in more of a gimmicky offense. That’s all method was trying to say, I think.
Pretty much
I’m not looking for a 6’0" QB just because there happens to be a couple in the HOF.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I wouldn't take any in the 1st round.
I’d rather take a QB in the 2nd or 3rd of this year’s draft.
I’d imagine your top 5 look something like this:
Matt Stafford (Georgia)
Sam Bradford (Oklahoma)
Tim Tebow (Florida)
Colt McCoy (Texas)
Mark Sanchez (USC)
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Tebow, I'm guessing, won't be a very good NFL QB.
Any of the other 4 would be better than the current options.
That's your opinion and like assholes everyone has one
The thought is at least out there that Tebow is considered a QB prospect, and a top one at that.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions
That's why I said I'm guessing.
He’s kinda going to have to learn to sit in the pocket and pass the ball instead of relying on his legs so much, IMO.
Hey, I could be totally wrong. I’ll probably be totally wrong, I don’t really follow football as hardcore as I do baseball.
I'm by no way endorsing Tebow
I’m just saying that their are some people that like his tools and his potential. Like I said I don’t want to draft a QB in the 1st. But if you asked if I’d rather have Tebow or Chilo Rachal in the 2nd. I might have to think pretty hard about Tebow especially if you incorporate him into an offense similar to what the Dolphins are doing with Ronnie Brown.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions
well
maybe you’re right, but I don’t want him, no more urban meyer QBs for me
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
+1
Matthew Stafford- Georgia
Sam Bradford- Oklahoma
Graham Harrell- Texas Tech
Mark Sanchez- USC
Curtis Painter- Purdue
Chase Daniels- Missouri
but these are players we might pursue in the first round:
Brian Orakpo- DE Texas
Michael Crabtree- WR Texas Tech
Andre Smith- OT Alabama
Terrence Cody- DT Alabama
Michael Johnson- DE Georgia Tech
Joe and Steve were under the same system for years... don't expect Smith to be super so soon.
YES WE DO!!
I think Orakpo is a beast which will let Sopoaga move inside at NT… I think he is stronger and more agile than Franklin..
Joe and Steve were under the same system for years... don't expect Smith to be super so soon.
'Bama boys
…love those guys. We’ll have no success until there’s quality depth on both sides of the line.
I highly doubt that the Niners will be running a 3-4 next year.
by methodrampage on Oct 28, 2008 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
i think that too
i’ve never been a fan of the 3-4. if singletary stays maybe they’ll just go back to the 4-3 or 46. that’d be a nice change
Fans stuck in the 80's are lame. Respect the past, live in the now.
3-4 vs 4-3
There are pluses and minuses for each scheme, so I don’t think the problem was choosing one or the other. The problem, as method has pointed out in plenty of other spaces and instances, is that the 49ers have failed to commit to one or the other.
As the team is currently set up, the 4-3 may be their best option. I highly doubt the 49ers can play a 46 defense. The corners, not to mention the safeties, just aren’t that good.

by 

























