Alex Smith, the 49ers and the "spread offense"

by Fooch on Oct 29, 2009 8:00 AM PDT in News Comment 68 comments

Since Sunday, much has been made of Alex Smith's second half performance. Smith was 15/22 for 206 yards, 3 TDs and 1 INT and looked quite comfortable in an offense that had been stuck in neutral (maybe even reverse?) for much of the first half. For those who watched the Fox broadcast, you heard Brian Billick throwing out the term "spread offense" quite frequently. The 49ers came into the season with an expressed intent of being a power running game, and I'd imagine when Billick was prepping for the game, he was not expecting to see an assortment of shotgun and 4-5 receiver formations. Throw in Alex Smith's own productivity in the Urban Meyer spread offense and it became an easy talking point as Smith was impressing folks.

Since then, we've had an assortment of articles breaking down the 49ers play-calling when Hill and Smith were each in the game and questions have been raised as to what kind of offense we were witnessing in the second half. Brian Billick described it as a spread offense, but the problem with the term "spread offense" is I think it gets thrown around a little too often. Matt Maiocco went so far as to seemingly say that based on their personnel packages, the 49ers were not in the spread offense. He never says, no it wasn't the spread offense, but he said he was dispelling that myth and then pointed to the personnel groupings, so I take that as his reasoning.

I bring this up now because last night we had a bit of a heated discussion over the use (or non-use) of the spread offense. I agree that simple personnel groupings on the field don't necessarily mean a certain style of offense is being utilized. I decided at that point to go back to the tape and review each of the 49ers second half offensive series and look at both the personnel AND the formations. After the jump, I start with totals of each formation and go into some of my thoughts on that. Then after that, for those that are curious, I've got the worksheet I used that includes a play-by-play breakdown, and then a series by series breakdown.

In looking at a potential "spread offense" a team like the 49ers has some interesting options for splitting guys out. As we all know, Vernon Davis and Delanie Walker are incredible athletes, even though they play the tight end position. Walker is a former wide receiver and Davis is just an absolute monster at tight end. I don't know enough about the spread offense (or the many variations of it) to say for certain, but wouldn't it seem logical that one could split out a tight end and/or RB as one of your receivers and it still be a spread type of offense?

Just to clarify initially, if a TE or RB was split wide, I referred to them as a receiver, but then in parenthesis I'd break down what positions were split out. In looking at the formations below, we've got 38 plays (including the final 8 plays of the final drive). I included plays where a penalty resulted (even procedure penalties), since we had a formation in place and an idea of what they were trying to do.

In the second half, the 49ers lined up with a mix of between 1 and 5 receivers on a given play. Here is the breakdown

1 or 2 receivers: 15 plays
3 receivers: 6 plays
4 receivers: 4 plays prior to final drive + 8 plays on last under 2-minute drive
5 receivers: 4 plays
Wildcat: 1 play

Of all those plays, they were in the shotgun 11 times, plus another 8 in the final drive. I continue to separate them out because of the context, but if you want to consider it all together, you've got the numbers to do that.

So after all the breakdown, what can we tell? I said above I'm no expert on the spread offense, so certainly take what I have to say with a grain of salt. My general impression from all of this is that the 49ers did mix in some spread style offense, but not so much as to think there was a huge overhaul. For example, when you run a 1 RB, 3 or 4 WR formation, does that automatically make it a spread offense? I guess in the literal translation it might. However, when I think of the spread offense I think more shotgun style. Obviously it doesn't always have to be that, but that's just what I happen to notice. Rather than call it a spread offense, I think I'll just call it "spreading out the offense." Maybe it's a very small distinction, but it's a distinction I like nonetheless.

One thing I do like about it is that it shows that Jimmy Raye might in fact be able to make adjustments and not just pound it up the middle. It will be especially interesting to see how that plays out this Sunday after Alex Smith has had a full week of first team practice, and Jimmy Raye has had a full week to game-plan around him. The 49ers will need to find ways to get points on the board because the Colts offense will certainly get their fair share of points no matter how the 49ers defense plays. Maybe a 49ers vertical attack is finally taking form (and if Sunday goes poorly, just ignore all this).

Below is a breakdown of the second half.

Second half formation totals
2 RB in I-formation, 1 TE on line, 2 WR lined up to left or right - 7

2 RB in I-formation, 2 TE on line, 1 WR split wide - 3

1 RB deep, 4 receivers (2 TE/2 WR) - 1

1 RB deep, 2 WR split, 2 TE on line - 4

1 RB deep, 3 WR, 1 TE on line - 2

1 RB deep, 3 TE, 1 WR - 1

Shotgun, 2 RB on each side of QB, 2 receivers split wide, 1 TE in slot - 2

Shotgun, empty backfield, 5 receivers (1 definitely a TE, 5th is RB/WR/TE) - 3

Shotgun, 5 WR (2 TE, 2 WR, 1 RB) - 1

Shotgun, 1 RB next to QB, 1 TE on line, 3 WR - 2

Shotgun, 1 RB next to QB, 4 WR (3 WR, 1 TE) - 3

Wildcat - 1

Final Series under 2 minutes

Shotgun, 1 RB next to QB, 4 WR (combination of WR/TE) - 8

2nd Half Offensive plays
Series 1

1st and 10 - 2 RB in I-formation, two receivers to the right, 1 TE on line

Gore rush

2nd and 12 - same formation

Pass to Crabtree

1st and 10 - same personnel, receivers switched to the left side

Encroachment penalty

1st and 5 - same formation

Gore rush

2nd and 5 - same personnel, FB offset, WRs to left side Bruce sent in motion to right side

Gore rush

1st and 10 - same personnel, receivers lined up to right side

Smith scramble up middle after offsides

1st and 5 - 2 RB in I-formation (FB quickly went in motion wide), 2 TEs on line, 1 WR lined up left

TD pass to Vernon Davis

Series 2

1st and 10 - 2 RB in I-formation, 2 TEs on line, 1 WR lined up left

Gore rush

2nd and 7 - 2 RB in I-formation, 2 TEs on line, 1 WR lined up right

Gore run

3rd and 6 - Shotgun - 2 RB (one on each side of QB), 2 receivers split wide each side, 1 TE in slot

Penalty

3rd and 11 - Shotgun - Empty backfield, 5 receiver set (1 TE and either an RB/TE/WR for the 5th receiver position)

Pass to Davis

Series 3

1st and 10 - 1 RB deep, 4 receivers (2 TEs , 2 WRs)

Smith scramble

1st and 10 - 1 RB deep, 2 WRs to the left, 2 TEs on line

Gore rush

2nd and 3 - Wildcat formation - 1 RB, 2 TE on line, 2 WR

Gore rush

1st and 10 - 1 RB deep, 2 TE on line, 2 WR to left (1 goes in motion to the right)

Pass to Crabtree - illegal motion penalty

1st and 15 - 1 RB deep, 3 WR, 1 TE on line

Pass to Davis

2nd and 7 - 1 RB deep, 3 WR, 1 TE on line

Pass to Bruce

3rd and 6 - Shotgun - 2 RB on each side of QB, 3 receivers split wide (might be TE in there

Pass to Crabtree

1st and 10 - 1 RB deep, 2 TE on line, 2 WR to right

Gore rush

2nd and 6 - Shotgun - 5 WR set (1 TE, 1 RB, 3 WR)

Incomplete pass

3rd and 6 - Shotgun - 1 RB next to QB, 1 TE on line, 3 WR split

Timeout before botched snap

3rd and 6 - Same formation (Davis went in motion, came back and split out a little bit to become a 4th split WR

Pass to Morgan

1st and 10 - 1 RB deep, 2 WR to left, 2 TE

TD pass to Davis

Series 4

1st and 10 - 2 RB (FB offset), 1 TE on line, 2 WR

Incomplete pass

1st and 10 - Shotgun - 5 receiver set, 1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR

Pass to Morgan

1st and 15 after delay of game - 3 TE, 1 RB, 1 WR

Incomplete pass

2nd and 15 - Shotgun - 1 RB next to QB, 4 receiver set (1 TE)

Pass to Davis

3rd and 6 - Same formation/personnel

Pass to Crabtree

1st and 10 - Same formation/personnel (originally lined up as offset I but switched before any kind of audible)

Pass to Morgan

1st and 10 - Shotgun - 5 receiver set (2 TE, 2 WR, 1 RB)

TD pass to Davis

Series 5 (final drive under 2 minutes)

1st and 10 - 1 RB next to QB, 4 WR

Pass to Morgan

1st and 10 - Same formation

Incomplete

2nd and 10 - Same formation

Pass to Bruce

1st and 10 - Spike play

Spike

2nd and 10 - Same formation

Incomplete

3rd and 5 - Same formation

Smith scramble out of bounds

4th and 5 - Same formation

Delay of game

4th and 10 - Same formation

Interception

Formations by Series
Series 1

Formation #s

2 RB in I-formation or FB off-tackle, 1 TE on line, 2 WR split wide - 6 plays

2 RB in I-formation or FB off-tackle, 2 TE on line, 1 WR split wide - 1 plays

Series 2

2 RB in I-formation, 2 TEs on line, 1 WR split wide - 2 plays

Shotgun, 2 RB on each side of QB, 2 receivers split wide, 1 TE in slot - 1 play

Shotgun, empty backfield, 5 receivers (1 definitely a TE, 5th is RB/WR/TE) - 1 play

Series 3

1 RB deep, 4 receivers (2 TE/2 WR) - 1

1 RB deep, 2 WR split, 2 TE on line - 4

1 RB deep, 3 WR, 1 TE on line - 2

Shotgun, 2 RB next to QB, 2WR/1 TE split wide - 1

Shotgun, 5 WR (3 WR, 1 TE, 1 RB) - 1

Shotgun, 1 RB next to QB, 1 TE on line, 3 WR - 2

Wildcat - 1

Series 4

2 RB, 1 TE on line, 2 WR - 1

1 RB deep, 3 TE, 1 WR - 1

Shotgun, 5 WR (3 WR, 1 RB, 1 TE) - 1

Shotgun, 5 WR (2 TE, 2 WR, 1 RB) - 1

Shotgun, 1 RB next to QB, 4 WR (3 WR, 1 TE) - 3

Series 5

Shotgun, 1 RB next to QB, 4 WR (combination of WR/TE) - 8

0 recs | Comment 68 comments | Add comment | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

One thing to consider.

People are getting WAY too focused on the number of WR vs TE vs RB etc….

The “spread offense” is not a formation, it is a strategy. The idea is to spread the field horizontally and open up the seams for runs and passes.

Texas Tech for instance uses the “spread offense” by flooding the field with receivers, but Arizona (Wildcats) use the QB and RBs more in the Spread. West Virginia uses it by focusing on the tailback and slot receiver.

Just saying don’t get locked into the formation so much as opposed to WHAT they were doing with the play calling.

"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."

The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related

by TexansForever on Oct 29, 2009 8:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

The purpose of the spread offense is to spread the defense out giving you more options. When you start playing with three, four and even five receiver sets you’re running a spread offense. Just because it’s not no huddle, or because the QB lines up under center for a few plays doesn’t mean it’s not the spread.

by smileyman on Oct 29, 2009 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Walsh offense flooded the field with receivers

And I would not call it “spread” though that may be semantics. Martz’s offense focused on spreading people out, bthh deep and sideline to sideline. But I don’t think of that as “spread” even if perhaps that’s what it was. I think people likely mean different things when they say spread and perhaps the biggest issue is some coaches (Myer @ UF) use it regardless of down and distance, whereas others use it as a change of pace or only because of certain down and distances. They would likely not think of it as spread but instead as “shotgun” or “2-minute offense” or “5-wide.” Same concepts different terminology.

You gotta bring ass to get ass.

by SpurredOn on Oct 29, 2009 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bill Walsh

did incorporate a new spread-style offense and re-named it the WC Offense. It was designed to spread the field as TexansForever mentions above and send some players on deep routes to spread the defense out mainly in an attempt to cause confusion and lack of coverages, man to man coverages, etc on the shorter to mid-range passes. And Mike Martz will tell you himself that he ran the spread offense a majority of the time. The reason the term has been so broadly used is because teams have expanded and innovated original ideas of the spread offense dating all the way back to 1927. When you have close to 100 years of something evolving, of course the terms and explanations will expand. While the actual term may have gotten diluted, most teams run some sort of “spread” offense or at the least store them in their playbooks. The way the Dolphins run the spread offense and the way the Patriots run the spread offense is going to be different. It’s not a cookie cut formation or offense so-to-speak.

by Drew K on Oct 29, 2009 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Walsh called it West Coast

I could be wrong but that’s a media creation. It’s the Bill Walsh offense, at least in my house. I think Martz would say he took some of Coryell’s offense and made it his own, which for a period of years was the “Greatest Show on turf.” Again, for the short-lived stuff I see it as semantics. For me, I only consider a team running the “spread” when it’s the basis of what they do 80% or more of the time. It’s their identity. When a non-spread team goes 3 or 4-wide I consider them going 4-wide or 2-minute drill offense because game circumstances change what they are doing, not an overall philosophy.

The best way I can say it is, when the Niners would go 4-wide with Rice, Taylor, Sherrard and Wilson, I didn’t think “they’re going run ’n shoot now.” I thought they’re going 4-wide. I don’t think the media referred to that formation as run ’n shoot unless the team was a full-time run ’n shoot squad (Oilers, Falcons, Lions). The Niners could go 4-wide and still ran BW offense plays and concepts.

You gotta bring ass to get ass.

by SpurredOn on Oct 29, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm trying to remember the personnel packages...

Would you say Kelly’s Bills teams were a no huddle version of the spread?

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Oct 29, 2009 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure. Of course they just called it no-huddle

But they did spread teams out, but since they always had a good TE, they weren’t run ‘n shoot. Now they would be called “spread” because it’s the term of the decade thanks to college ball. Of course the no huddle aspect was meant to increase the number of possessions and wear teams out but had the side affect of doing the same to their own defense.

You gotta bring ass to get ass.

by SpurredOn on Oct 29, 2009 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Or Houston Oilers

run-and-shoot with Warren Moon and co.

There are traditional spread sets and plays that are still used in teams playbooks. I can almost guarantee that every team in the NFL has some form or other of spread sets and plays. The Niners were running that a majority of the time in the 4th Qtr and some even mixed in the 3rd. So one could argue that it was close to 80% that they were in some form of the “spread”

by Drew K on Oct 29, 2009 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The West Coast

…offense was Don “Air” Coryell’s creation. It emphasized lots of deep vertical passing like we got with Martz. Walsh’s offense was pass heavy, but emphasized short ball-control passes. As I recall, Walsh thought the label “West Coast” offense was a media mistake. His influence wasn’t Coryell, but rather Paul Brown.

by Bigmouth on Oct 30, 2009 8:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm just glad...

…to see the shotgun as a regular part of our offense after the year of Martz. I realize it’s not our West Coast tradition, but Smith looks much more comfortable in shotgun.

by Bigmouth on Oct 29, 2009 8:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The shotgun is great to use

when your offensive line can’t pass block all that well. Gives more cushion to their blocking. Problem is that you can’t run very well from it except for draws and what not.

by smileyman on Oct 29, 2009 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm..

…don’t college teams run regularly out of shotgun spreads? I would think it’s a good formation to run from because you face one less linebacker.

by Bigmouth on Oct 29, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's usually a lot harder

The reason is because when the QB is under center the RB gets to a full head of steam by the time the QB hands the ball off, but out of a shotgun the RB gets the ball from basically a stand still position. This obviously makes it harder for him to get to the hole quickly and explode through it. This is even more exaggerated in short yardage situations when the idea is to have a quick-hit play, which is why you’ll see even guys like Tim Tebow take snaps from under center occasionally on 3rd or 4th and 1.

by Brendan Scolari on Oct 29, 2009 9:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yup

Plus it gives the secondary that little bit of extra time to see the running play develop and plug any gaps that develop. Now if you’re running the option the shotgun is perfect. For power running the shotgun is horrible.

by smileyman on Oct 29, 2009 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

running out of shotgun--in the National Football League

It’s also much more difficult to run out of shotgun in the pros because the d-linemen are much better—that is to say, much less easily caught off guard by a run. In college, the fact that the offensive players know what’s coming leads them to have a much bigger advantage over the defensive linemen. In the pros d-linemen have better technique and coaching such that they tend to swallow up plays where the RB doesn’t have a head of steam to power through the meat hooks that the linemen are able to put out there while still engaged with the O-lineman. The only pro team I’ve really see run effectively out of shotgun is the New England Patriots with Kevin Faulk—and they’re able to do so because they have had a legitimately scary passing attack and an excellent offensive line.

Apropos of nothing, the ‘O-Lines own D-Lines in college’ point is one of the reasons why Tim Tebow will never be a good pro quarterback.

Morgan breaks through in 2009!

by grantmp on Oct 29, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

Great comment, completely agree.

by Brendan Scolari on Oct 29, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't the Colts...

…often run from the shotgun?

by Bigmouth on Oct 30, 2009 8:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I saw that stat somewhere yesterday.....Manning takes something like 44% of his snaps from the gun.

"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."

The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related

by TexansForever on Oct 30, 2009 8:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks...

…for the explanation. I suppose that makes sense.

by Bigmouth on Oct 30, 2009 8:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And some QBs feel it gives them better and quicker field vision

You gotta bring ass to get ass.

by SpurredOn on Oct 29, 2009 10:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

AGREE

This is a really correct observation smileyman. It is a useful tool when your O-line can’t pass protect. It obviously takes the dive and off-tackle play away, but, the ‘niners could still get the ball into Gore’s hands effectively with screens and draws… this will be one of the more interesting things to watch on Sunday, how much Jimmy Raye relys on the shotgun. My opinion, until they find a way to effectively pass protect, they should be in shotgun more than they’ve been to this point.

by mwright84 on Oct 29, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think if they went to a very aggressive pass offense

We could catch Indy off guard. Come out guns blazing the first few drives, stretching the field, mistakes be damned. THEN hopefully we’re within a touchdown or so and we start ramming the ball up their gut once we’ve got their lineman blazing upfield to tee off on the QB and the safeties pushed back. The second they move back in hit em with the play action deep.

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Oct 29, 2009 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i guess it’s almost irony? that with a run oriented coordinator we’re using the gun, whereas it was different with Martz

by PiKAgiant on Oct 29, 2009 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

love the gun

I love the gun bc it gives Smith more vision to see the defense pre-snap and he has a head start on his drop back. running out of it can be challenging but as someone said that the RB doesn’t get a full head of steam before he get’s the ball…he also gets the ball sooner and if he has good vision, can determine his hole earlier.

All I’m saying is that while it’s a different animal, it can be done well.

If we can establish a good passing game with 3+ WR’s in the game, that sets up nice for some wildcat with Gore and hopefully Robinson or Coffee in the game. I’d like to see that.

by Tre9er on Oct 29, 2009 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Plus he has the ability to pass on the run, because there are going to be times in this game that one of the ends is going to beat the tackle, so he’s going to be running out of the pocket. When you have a QB that can throw the ball downfield and spread the ball out, you have to imagine that there’d be room for the QB to possibly run it himself

by PiKAgiant on Oct 29, 2009 9:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hope he does run some

That’s why I like a spread option and the Wildcat too. If the ends are coming upfield, run up the middle on them. If they crash in, bounce it outside. If they bring extra guys, beat them deep or over the middle.

by Tre9er on Oct 29, 2009 10:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He just needs...

…to protect that shoulder if he runs or dives… I hope the coaches have him in Karate classes on how to fall…

by StereoPete on Oct 29, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

why

why after 6 games they still now figure that you cant run the ball like you used to…. also can sombody explain to me why in joe montana’s name do we have michael spurlock / demetric evans on the roster? why the hell is 89hill not being used… why is arnaz cut or given more playing time???

Misanthropy

by alexgalvez49ers on Oct 29, 2009 10:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agree with Evans/Spurlock

At the beginning of the season I liked Spurlock a lot. He was quick, had good hands and could have been a decent returner, but the 49ers aren’t using him there so I want him gone. As far as Evans goes, I don’t think he brings anymore to the table than RJF does, so why not make Evans inactive for a few games and let RJF play a few?

by Ninjames on Oct 29, 2009 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd like to see RJF play in a game or two

Was it the last game he was almost assured of not playing due to his late arrival back from the bye?

You gotta bring ass to get ass.

by SpurredOn on Oct 29, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Advice

I have some advice for Alex Smith, some Very Good advice. Alex, sit down with Crabtree and have him tell you how he "practiced being calm." When I read that Crabtree explained to reporters that he practiced being calm, I was thunderstruck. I consider myself a fairly bright person, but of all the stressful spots I have been in I never ever thought of the idea of "practicing being calm." Perhaps I am just stupid. Alex if you have never done this, ask Crabtree how he does it.

by CorneliusJ on Oct 29, 2009 10:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Meditation?

by Bob On The Coast on Oct 29, 2009 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"BEING"

In stressfull times I have often done things to try to make myself calm, but never thought of just “being” calm without any tricks. And yea maybe meditation is what I’m getting at.

by CorneliusJ on Oct 30, 2009 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

alex smith...

i youtubed some of his videos… he has a lot of fire in him… we dont really see it but he has the same intensity as hill… just might miss it but he is a fighter as well… people also overlook the fact that he can get the first down with his feet… ala the 06 seahawks game in seattle…. great game!!

Misanthropy

by alexgalvez49ers on Oct 29, 2009 10:50 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He doesn't just lay down

Like others I wasn’t sold on Smith’s happy feet when he was a rookie. However after seeing Smith shrugged Kelly Herndon while coming off a blitz, I was impressed.Now only if he can do the same thing with Freeney. Who knows? Freeney was impressed on how many times he just popped up whenever he get’s sacked when they played him. Normally after two you would feel it. Bernard laid him flat intentionally and probably why Karna bit them on week two.

by miksar617 on Oct 29, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He throws a lot of blocks down the field, that’s for sure.

Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.

by howtheyscored on Oct 29, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Alex played in a spread offense in college

Incase some of you dont remember. He worked almost exclusively out of the shotgun formation while at UTAH. He knows how to spread the field and sling the ball around. Im sure after all these years in the NFL he can finally be adequate under center, but hes ALWAYS going to be more comfortable out of the gun.

I dont understand why with all the problems on the O-Line they cant formulate a 2back passing offense where one or both of the backs stays in to help with protection. Robinson and Gore are both adequate blockers and can catch the ball and run with it as a checkdown option as well if nobodys open downfield……all these problems on the offensie line worry me. Who knew not addressing the lack of depth/talent on the o-line in the offseason would hurt the teams playoff hopes.

by Beatclash on Oct 29, 2009 11:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

i think

alex will make the oline look decent with his play… smith also has shown escapability like steve young

Misanthropy

by alexgalvez49ers on Oct 29, 2009 11:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

WHOA!

Let’s not compare his mobility with Steve Young! Young was a guy who could run the football…who learned how to throw it. Smith is nimble on his feet, but he’s no Steve Young.

I do like that he can move better than Hill though. However in the preseason games I saw Smith slide out of the pocket nervously too often only to force a throw or throw it away, etc. Often times there were receivers open too. He needs to be calm, patient, but feel the rush.

by Tre9er on Oct 29, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Alex Smith = Steve Young?

I’ll believe that when I see Smith throw the ball off the a D-Lineman, catch it and run for the first down. Even after all these years, that’s the play that puts Steve Young up in the pantheon for me.
Smith must also post ratings of 101.8, 107.0, 101.5 and 112.8 in consecutive years.

Morgan breaks through in 2009!

by grantmp on Oct 29, 2009 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How about

The greatest run in NFL history according to NFL films? That one doesn’t leap to your head?

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Oct 29, 2009 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXF6a2ZXgp0

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Oct 29, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

couple of winning seasons wouldn't hurt either...

"An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded."

The ROSENFAIL : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAKAKE-uq-8&feature=related

by TexansForever on Oct 29, 2009 6:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm weary of that statement right now

False start…..on the offense…5 yard penaly….repeat 3rd down.

Just watch this and you may wanna retract that statement for the time being.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Biyx-UPrYf4

by Drew K on Oct 29, 2009 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

hey

i didnt say he is up to par with his throws.. simply he showed me that he can get around when needed. ive looked at film and he is a bit faster at it. i agree patience… on sunday he showed that he is going to run if pressured… even if there is people down field…. i think sing would like him to run for the first and live another set of downs ..

Misanthropy

by alexgalvez49ers on Oct 29, 2009 11:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think Alex will do well...

so long as we retain those shotgun plays. He lived under that system back when he was in Utah…which stands to reason, it would work for him here @ the Pro level.

by Doni S on Oct 29, 2009 1:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Tom Brady has had alot of success with it.

The thing is you can be successful with very simple play designs. Look at the broncos, gettin’ it done!

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Oct 29, 2009 1:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Tom Brady is also one of the greatest quaterbacks of all-time

And plays with a great line and (for the last few years) fantastic receivers. None of those things apply to the Niners offense.

by Brendan Scolari on Oct 29, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kyle Orton

Is seeming to be a pro bowl caliber QB with the same offense. He just doesn’t have Randy Moss, which remains the best thing to happen to Tom Brady, next to playing for Belichek. So he doesn’t have Super Bowl success, but he has above .500 success, I’ll take that!

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Oct 29, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But if Smith has

Is what was meant

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Oct 29, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have no idea what your trying to argue

Are you trying to say Orton is nearly as good as Brady?

by Brendan Scolari on Oct 29, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not arguing anything

I’m saying when the offense is spread simple plays can become bigger than in tighter formations. Of course Brady is a far better QB, I’m just saying that type of offense bodes well for QB’s in general. Orton looks like a pro bowler to me and he is in the same system. Orton has one WR and 3 or 4 average wideouts, and looks exceptionally well. Brady was successful in that system with no WR’s and adding Moss makes him looks worlds better than before.

So if Smith were in that type of system, even with minimal OL help, he can at least be good enough to make us an above .500 team. I’m not comparing Brady to anyone. Just talking about the system

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Oct 29, 2009 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He also has an elite O-line

That gives him time to throw. Smith would get killed under the same conditions I think. But yes, the system has made Orton look pretty good.

by Brendan Scolari on Oct 29, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Um, Orton has a couple good receivers. Ever hear of baby T.O.? Brandon Marshall is a pretty darn good receiver.

by aBulldog on Oct 29, 2009 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tom Brady...

I honestly think he is overrated now… I mean there are a lot of QBs that can do what he has with the kind of time his line provides…

by Joshpreet on Oct 29, 2009 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

yup

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Oct 29, 2009 3:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think he's in the top 5

But I’d say he’s definitely in the discussion as being one of the best 10 quarterbacks ever.

by Brendan Scolari on Oct 29, 2009 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

How many QB's get drafted into that situation?

Not many. Before Moss Brady managed games. He became a TD throwing machine when he got Moss. He ad several game winning drives that resulted in FG’s. He is however very accurate and cool when he isn’t pressured. Like any other QB when the pressure is on he’s not much to marvel at.

"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco

by rlott#42 on Oct 29, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even Culpepper

was a TD machine with Moss. Think about that people before you anoint Brady as one of the greatest.

Gimme 1 round!

by ItBurnzWhenIP on Oct 30, 2009 5:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

early years with Vikings Culpepper > old, busted-knee, fat Culpepper

A good wideout makes his QB look better, but Culpepper slipped very quickly after he tore his ACL. In fact, really he’s still recovering.

Morgan breaks through in 2009!

by grantmp on Oct 30, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thing is, is when you start comparing Brady’s stats and records and when you actually sit down and watch him play, THEN compare him to the other QB’s in the top 10, you will all change your mind and put him in the top 5. When his career is done, he’ll probably sit in the top 3, somewhere behind Joe Montana.

You guys are writing all these things about how his O-Line is so awesome, and that for the last few years he’s had some great receivers, or maybe is playing under a legendary coach, and that’s the reason why he’s been so successful… well, how do you think Joe Montana did it? Do you think it was all Joe? NO! He had the exact same thing that Brady has. Good receivers, and O-Line, smart coach… etc.

The one QB I think is overrated is Brett Favre… in fact, I think (so far) that this is one of his best seasons since his MVP years. It’s like, it took him 80 years to finally realize how to play the game and limit your mistakes.

by aBulldog on Oct 29, 2009 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don’t think so, SF pass protection was good, not great

I can still see Joe under intense pressure all game long twice every year from Pat Swilling and Ricky Jackson of the Saints, and Joe beating them every time. The Saints would win 12 games and still be a Wild Card team because they lost twice to Joe. And the Saints weren’t the only team to pressure Joe, remember the Giants with Lawrence Taylor. And there were others.

by CorneliusJ on Oct 29, 2009 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs