Alex Smith vs Aaron Rodgers(updated)
by Tony C on Nov 10, 2009 9:50 PM PST
Email
Print
Who do you guys believe is a better quarterback now? Its been some years and both have had totally different paths. How do you think Aaron Rodgers would of been if he was drafted by the 49ers. I believe that he would of had been in the same situation as Alex Smith. The 49ers has had different systems and offensive coordinators every year since we picked up Alex Smith as the number one overall draft pick. Here goes a stat by stat comparison.
Alex Smith Aaron Rodgers
Games 36 32
Pct 55.7 63.4
Yards 5487 6811
TD 25 46
Int 37 19
Sacks 91 84
QB Rating 65.7 95.1
Wins/Losses 12/23 10/15
Now stats wise it is a no brainer that Aaron Rodgers would be a better quarterback but where my concern is, is the wins and losses part. I would say Aaron Rodgers has played on much better teams then Alex Smith has and he can only come up with 10 wins and 14 losses? As I watch both of these players now I see many comparisons. Alex Smith makes better reads. Aaron Rodgers seems to hold on to the ball way to long and the packers and 49ers have both equally as bad offensive lines. Both of these quarterbacks seem to not be able to make the play to win the game. They play good when they play but they just dont win games for your team. I believe with Alex Smiths experience he surpasses Aaron Rodgers as a better quarterback. As terrible as Smith has been so far this season during the pressure points of the games, he has played fairly decent and I feel comfortable with him as our quarterback. Ultimately, Aaron Rodgers will probably have a better career.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.
118 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I didn't vote because this post is dumb.
What’s the point of comparing the two if they’ve been put in very different situations. Alex Smith is currently under his second coach and 5th offensive coordinator and hasn’t had the same OC (continuity) for more than one year at a time, but has shown potential. Rodgers, meanwhile (if I’m not mistaken), had Mike Sherman his first year (but sat out a very long time behind Favre) and has had Mike McCarthy ever since 2006, with the same offensive coordinator (Joe Philbin). If one were to compare the two QBs coming out of college, the comparison would be legitimate. But after taking two very different NFL paths, the two are no longer comparable.
Natural hater of all NY, Pittsburgh, Oakland, LA, and Dallas teams
I didn't think this post was dumb.
I think this is a great discussion to have leading up to this week’s game in Green Bay.
Thanks Tony C for posting this and I’m sure as we get closer to Sunday this post will get more and more views.
by Redding49ers on Nov 17, 2009 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
Thanks
What I am trying to do is talk myself into thinking Alex Smith is a better quarterback. It might be true but they have both not lived up to potential.
How many times has Joe Montana thrown an interception in a super bowl?
I still believe Rodgers is better
He holds on to the ball a tad too long, but most of the time he burns a defense when given a little bit more time.
He’s been great for my fantasy team (even with all the sacks).
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
2 All-Pro WR's
Plus the same system for as many years as in the league and no glaring or lingering injuries vs A new OC in as many years as played no all-pro WR’s, is there really a comparison from a team perspective? Rogers took over for a team tat was one game from the Superbowl and hasn’t managed a .500 record. Smith has been on a horrible has had two starts in yet another NEW system. Rodgers has numbers, but he’s not winning. Rodgers should have been in the playoffs if he so much better than Smith. Since he hasn’t I call it a draw.
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
Ever wondered..
What would have been if McCarthy were still the Niner OC? This would be year five with the same system for Alex and no changes for any other long-term players.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Yes.
That whole situation was odd. I mean how often is it that the OC of the 32nd ranked offense gets plucked away by another team to be their HC
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Yet another reason to hate Brett Favre
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Nov 13, 2009 9:17 PM PST up reply actions
Still not sold on him as a HC
But he obviously can build an offense and it would’ve been nice to have that one guy and his system all these years. That it’s from an extended branch of the Walsh tree would’ve been even better.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
As discussed in other threads, football is a very team-oriented sport. A QB needs receivers to get open and catch the ball, a RB needs his blockers to block, the defense needs the offense to sustain drives to keep them off the field… Football is the ultimate team sport, because everyone has to do their job right if the team is to win the game.
Therefore, discussing the merits of a quarterback based on the team’s record is a bad idea. Being as how the QB doesn’t play on defense or special teams (Cody Pickett notwithstanding), a QB really only has control over a finite period of the game.
So look past W/L to judge the two QBs.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
What pains me the most
is that while I agree with what everyone has commented, that you cannot compare the two, I can see what’s coming soon. Starting this Friday… maybe even Thursday night, this discussion will be everywhere for a week and a half. The Smith vs Rodgers debate is going to get really old really quick.
Is there a worse way to determine QB skill than Wins and Losses?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Yes, there are lots of worse ways
There are plenty of QB’s with skills that don’t seem to have the ‘it’ factor. If you were down in the fourth quarter and had to choose between Big Ben and Jay Cutler, who would you choose? Ben has proven over and over that he may or may not have the skills of Cutler, but when it’s on the line he’ll make the play. Rogers has not proven that despite ‘signs of greatness’ and neither has Cutler.
To me, the point of this post is not to compare apples to apples, but to show that despite being in much better circumstances and being regarded as a great QB of the future, Rogers hasn’t done all that much more than Smith. Yet for some reason we all want to bail on Smith (again and again).
In his second year in the league, he put up average numbers on a horrid team, as a young rookie (20 vs 23 for Flacco, going by memory), and has been injured or on the bench pretty much since then. Cut him some slack and let him play. In two years, maybe he’ll be David Carr or maybe he’ll be Brett Favre (Favre’s 2nd year: 19td and 24int and a 72 rating vs Smiths 16 and 16 and a 75 rating).
Huh?
To me, the point of this post is not to compare apples to apples, but to show that despite being in much better circumstances and being regarded as a great QB of the future, Rogers hasn’t done all that much more than Smith. Yet for some reason we all want to bail on Smith (again and again).
He hasn’t done much more? Seems to me he’s thrown almost twice as many touchdowns and half as many interceptions as Smith, he’s thrown for 1300 more yards in 4 less games, completed a higher percentage of passes, etc.
He’s basically been better than Smith in every aspect of the game listed EXCEPT win/loss, which has so little to do with one specific player it’s borderline comical when people continue to point at it as proof of, well, anything at all when it comes to evaluating single players.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Yeah he has done more statistically
He doesn’t close out games, he has been in the same system his whole career and wasn’t thrown into the fire and asked to be someone he wasn’t.
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
sigh.
Okay.
It’s HIS fault that Green Bay is 4-4 right now, and it has nothing to do with the fact that their defense is abysmal. Sure.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Actually the teams chemistry is in the toilet and that's the problem.
And their HC sucks. I was pointing out he is and has been in a better situation than Smith and with Smith’s injuries it’s not a fair comparison.
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
See Below Comment
GB defense is the 4th ranked defense in the league.
the have played
The Lions
The Rams
THe Browns
The Bucs
The Bears
Vikings twice
They have had some really bad opponents this year. Not impressive
Go 49ers
4th ranked by DVOA, which is opponent adjusted.
It’s not an end-all stall, but it does weaken the “they played bad teams” argument.
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 Nov 12, 2009 8:59 PM PST up reply actions
They have a LMAOline
And no real running game to speak of.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Nov 13, 2009 9:19 PM PST up reply actions
Ooh, that's much better than LOLine.
I’m stealing that. Thanks.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Plus
Their 4th ranked defense let a Rookie QB that only practiced for 2 days score 2 TDs on them (and a 2 pt conversion).
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Nov 13, 2009 9:21 PM PST up reply actions
Another DVOA fail
Not even close to a top ranked defense. That Packer defense might be average at best.
Well, let's see:
Not even close to a top ranked defense. That Packer defense might be average at best.
Packers ranking:
YPG: 4
PPG: 17
Passing Yds/Att: 10
Rushing yds/Att: 2nd
3rd down pct: 4th
Ints: 4th
Fumbles forced: 15.
In other words, while there’s a little peculiarity given the disparity between yards and points which is interesting, it’s hard not to look at these numbers and think:
DVOA: 1 Bignerd’s unsupported assertions: 0.
I have to give them credit today
Although I blame Dallas much more than I give Green Bay credit.
Still, GB isn’t anywhere near that good. They have good CB’s and they play smoke and mirrors in the pass rush. Before Dallas (a bit overrated but not bad) the only NFL caliber offense they had faced was the Vikings and the Vikings had their way with them.
Unsupported? My support was right there in iaalexeeff comment:
The Lions
The Rams
THe Browns
The Bucs
The Bears
Vikings twice
Well, the smackdown they laid down on Dallas undercuts your argument ...
… but also Minn basically had their way with us, and our offense didn’t help them as much. They got a lot of TOs against the pack, if I recall correctly.
In any event, their performance today was far more consistent with DVOA’s predictions than with yours. :)
One Game Sample
And Minny got a last second 32 yard TD pass and kickoff return to lay 27 points on the 49ers.
The 49ers should be able to run against Green Bay (something Dallas didn’t even bother to try). Seeing how bad our WR were against bump coverage against Chicago I’m not sure the 49ers were able to pass the ball at all.
I'm interested to see how our receivers handle the press coverage
These will be the best group of corners they’ve gone against this season. And it will be on the road and chilly. Heck of a test for these young players. I also heard during that game that GB has now forced a turnover in eleven straight games.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
One game sample?
Well, jeeze, we also have a multi-game sample. You know, that one I cited earlier, which had them at say, 4th in YPG.
And you said that doesn’t count because it was against bad teams. So okay, now we have a result (and how!) against a good team.
And you dismissed that, too.
You’re basically going to dismiss any statistic which doesn’t agree with what you say, huh?
Still 65% of their data is from the dregs of the NFL. Still believe the Cowboys played a terrible game. If they are ranked that high at the end of the season than I will believe it.
Quite a bit of nearly every team’s schedule is played against awful opponents. Singling one team out for that particular quirk of scheduling is a bit unfair.
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 Nov 17, 2009 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
They scored 27 on us
Vs 30 and 38 vs. GB.
If you’re going to say – as Bignerd did – that they “had their way” against GB, averaging 34 pts, it’s pretty hard to say that they didn’t have their way against us, getting 27. We did a little better, but not a ton better.
I'm only thinking of the SF-MIN game
Vikings had 13 points from their offense through 59:58 of game time. 20 total, plus the Niners picked off one pass, dropped two others and pressured Favre effectively. I think they did quite better when assessing the entire game.
I would agree that they had their way in GB for about 3/4 of the game. From what I recall watching, they really moved up and down the field without much resistance.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
True
We have played some pretty weak competition so far this year but our defense has shown some flashes of brilliance. Unfortunately, our defense has suffered from our offense not being able to sustain time consuming drives (because our o-line is awful) and from us likely having by far the worst special teams in the league.
The Vikes and Bucs both put up 38 on us, but this was largely in part to our offense and special teams. In the Bucs game the defense only gave up 24 points (blocked punt for TD and pick 6), and were given another gift when Rodgers threw a pick which was returned to our 6 yard line. And against the Vikes our poor special teams played kill us. They started in our territory on all of their scoring drives besides one possession, and we had some stupid after the whistle personal foul penalties which kept their drives alive.
I don’t think by any means our defense is actually the 4th best in the league, but I do think it’s probably top 10.
by packallday555 on Nov 19, 2009 10:36 PM PST up reply actions
Favre won with the same Packer team
Criticizing Rogers for the W/L record is a relevant and fair measurement.
Eh
But Favre didn’t have 5 starters hurt on defense in 07’ like Rodgers did in 08’. In 7 of our 10 losses our defense failed to stop the opposing teams offense after Rodgers had either led us on a drive to tie the game or to take the lead.
Offensively from 07’ to 08’ there is virtually no drop off as we averaged 27 points both years. But defensively from 07’ to 08’ our defense dropped from 6th in scoring defense to 23rd.
by packallday555 on Nov 19, 2009 10:39 PM PST up reply actions
I’d love to have the 7 or 8 seconds that Ben seems to get in the pocket every time he drops back to pass. My understanding is that Cutler is sitting behind 5 guys who make better gaping holes than they do walls.
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 Nov 11, 2009 11:12 AM PST up reply actions
It really sucks for Aaron Rodgers that he can drop a 35 spot on a weekly basis and still lose 6 out of 10 times. But I guess that’s his fault.
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 Nov 11, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
A 35 spot and still lose?
For the record, he dropped exactly one ‘35 spot’ this year on the Rams. I will agree that the statement ’hasn’t done all that much more than Smith’ was a bit of a stretch. Got excited in the heat of the moment. The TD/INT ratio is impressive, but the ‘Great’ ones are remembered for the ‘Great’ wins and not great stats. Hopefully both Rodgers and Smith will have many in the future, but so far Rodgers has the history of coming up a bit short in the big games
I was being hyperbolic. Aaron Rodgers and that Green Bay offense are prolific and dynamic on a weekly basis, and their porous defense coughs up wins like their in the throes of a life-threatening addiction to losing.
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 Nov 11, 2009 12:45 PM PST up reply actions
I agree they could come up bigger at the right time, but the GB defense is currently the 4th ranked in the NFL. In their four wins, the defense held opponents to under 20 points. Rodgers had a pick-6 in the fourth quarter last week at Tampa and he had a drive stall when they were down by 5 at the end of the fourth to the Vikings. I don’t hang it all on him, especially when he rallied well against the Vikings and had great numbers, but to be a great QB you need to be successful in those situations.
Wow, actually their defense is a lot better this year than I thought it was. Although it’s definitely been helped out by the shutout to the Lions and the 3 spot given up the Browns.
Losses with scores of 38, 38, 30, and 31 is tough, though. But DVOA appears kind to them. Without looking deeper into it, I’m not quite sure what to make of their defense right now. Is it awful with some massive outliers? Is it decent with some inconsistency? Is it good with some bad luck? I’m really not 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 Nov 11, 2009 2:40 PM PST up reply actions
I was surprised as well. I don’t even really want to prove that Rodgers isn’t good, I just get caught up in the debate. The GB defense hasn’t been bad. Of those four scores, a 38 and a 30 to the Vikings isn’t that bad either. They average over 30 a game and only PIT has done anything to stop them. I think all around the Vikes and Bengals are probably better teams than GB, but you just don’t get that same ‘uh, oh’ feeling when Rodgers gets the ball in the 4th quarter as you do with Manning, Brady, Big Ben, Rivers, etc.
Niners stopped them too.
I know, splitting hairs, but just sticking up for our guys. The only difference from Pittsburgh is the Niners dropped their 4th quarter pick-6 whereas the Steelers did not.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Ugh… there/their/they’re. :/
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 Nov 11, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions
I think you meant to say
Shaun Hill The defense dropped a 35 spot on the Rams too
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
yep forget to mention the ST
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
In 2008?
That was with Martz at the helm.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Nov 15, 2009 12:38 AM PST up reply actions
Ben has proven over and over that he may or may not have the skills of Cutler, but when it’s on the line he’ll make the play.
Has he really?
Or has he merely been given enough opportunities in big moments that the law of averages suggests he’ll have a few successes.
It’s easy to remember a player’s wins – not so easy to remember their mediocre games. And, of course, Ben had the opportunity to play almost his entire career on teams which had excellent defenses and running games, which Cutler never did. But, of course, Big Ben threw three picks in a playoff loss to Jacksonville – is that “mak[ing] the play?” You think his 23 interceptions had something to do with the team missing the playoffs in 2006 despite a top-10 defense and a top-five rushing game?
In his two years as a full-time starter in Denver, Cutler never had a defense ranked higher than 28th(!!!) and he never had a top-five rushing game. I’m not saying that Cutler is a great QB, but to compare him and Rothliesberger based on “making the play” is absurd.
I am very curious to see what Smith is capable of. I’d like to think that his performances in his first two games this year would give his critics pause. They weren’t perfect games – but they were a lot better than his critics would have thought him capable of. Shouldn’t that earn him a little slack from those same critics? Or is it that, having been wrong, they need him to fail to vindicate their earlier position?
I’d like to think that his performances in his first two games this year would give his critics pause. They weren’t perfect games – but they were a lot better than his critics would have thought him capable of. Shouldn’t that earn him a little slack from those same critics?
Come on, man! You can’t just hold up six quarters of football where he looked half-decent as proof that “maybe” he’s improved! Didn’t you see the last game? Didn’t you! In that one game he was awful! He’s never been good and that one game proves that he hasn’t gotten any better. None. Not at all. Psh.
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 Nov 11, 2009 3:20 PM PST up reply actions
Personally, I don’t need even a full game to prove how awful Smith is. I can easily cherry pick specific plays to show how he obviously hasn’t grown as a QB. Never will I mention any touchdown drives, or deficits closed, or anything like that. Nope, I will only point to sailed passes, interceptions, and fumbles, while pointing out that no other quarterback ever does any of those things by cherry picking plays for them too.
Full game evidence is for suckers.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
Superbowl winning coach comments on Smith
After saying his arm looks better and that he has the physical skills, Mike Martz says: “He has to win. And he has to be the reason why you win a big game. The really good players in the league, the guys that have won for a long time and win championships, they step up. When things are at their worst, he’s got to be at his best.”
Yay for speaking in cliches and taking that as fact.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Yeah
He goes a bit overboard as any analyst tends to do. The goal for Alex, as any quarterback or player on any team, is to prove he can play consistently well for entire games at a time.
by InTimmyWeTrust on Nov 12, 2009 9:34 AM PST up reply actions
Alex Smith is better
If Singletary is smart, he’ll keep alex for one more year and see him make strides. My worst fear is Alex realizing his potential while not with the 49ers
by SFNinerFan on Nov 11, 2009 11:04 AM PST via mobile reply actions
Plus
Mike Nolan has repeatedly said that while rodgers might have the better numbers, alex will win more games. Hasn’t happened yet but in time it will
by SFNinerFan on Nov 11, 2009 11:05 AM PST via mobile reply actions
I’ve never heard Singletary speak about Smith and Rodgers comparatively.
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 Nov 11, 2009 11:12 AM PST up reply actions
Oh geez. Reading Comprehension + Me = Hippopotamus?
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 Nov 11, 2009 11:15 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Nov 13, 2009 9:21 PM PST up reply actions
Here's the bottom line!!
Aaron Rogers is a more accurate QB than Smith. He hasn’t had injuries or a pitiful offense around him. He took over a team that was one game away from the Superbowl and hasn’t even gone to the playoffs, so let’s just say there isn’t anything solid that would say that we’d be better off with Rogers. All the stats and he’s not pulling out wins offensively, you lose because you didn’t score enough points and that’s the bottom line. What is the Packers record in comparison to ours? We have the Seahawks and the Rams and they have the Lions and Bears, so don’t start with that weaker division crap.
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
you lose because you didn’t score enough points and that’s the bottom line.
You lose because you score fewer points than your opponents. There are two parts to the game, Aaron only plays on offense. The defense has to hold up their end of the bargain too…
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 11, 2009 4:48 PM PST up reply actions
And for some reason
When the offense is playing decent the defense struggles and vice versa. When the defense does well, the offense struggles
SIgn of losing
Just like the Colts are catching the breaks, whether the game vs the Niners, Texans or Jags. You make some of your own luck. And sometimes a winning or losing streak comes down to scoring 35 when you give up 30, or allowing 6 when you only score 10. It’s nice to again be on the right side of one of these.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Haha yeah!
That’s our problem haha and it’s not a good one to have. We’re super inconsistent and a lot of that falls onto McCarthy. He isn’t a great coach and is a horrible play caller.
Our defense looked like a top 5 one in the league against the Cowboys but it wouldn’t surprise me if they looked like a mediocore one against you guys. The whole team besides our offense is so streaky.
by packallday555 on Nov 19, 2009 10:42 PM PST up reply actions
i wouldn't trade Alex Smith for Rodgers,
but it is really not the right time to ask this question. We should come back to this post in 3 years.
My money is on Alex. If we get an oline, then I think we will be in the playoffs, perhaps NFC championship, in one or two years.
Your stats are from where?
I find it hard to figure out how Smith has 35 games yet his win/loss only equals 34 and Rodgers has 31 games but his W/L only = 24.
Let me give you a clue on that one
Games is just games played
while the win/loss record comes from games they actually started.
Sorry to all the Smith supporters...
I guess I see how you can kinda make the argument that Smith has never had a real shot, but to use that to justify your belief that Rodgers and Smith are equals as quarterbacks is like arguing that creationism is valid by saying “you can’t prove me wrong”.
No, it's not, actually.
But understanding why would require that you read and engage with posts you disagree with, which it seems clear from that analogy that you have no interest in doing.
Really?
In not one single post supporting Smith have I seen ANY convincing evidence that would get me anywhere remotely closer to considering him and Rodgers being on the same level.
In no part of his career have I personally seen anything that would suggest that either.
The only argument in “favor” of Smith seems to be “it’s not fair because he’s had different OCs, his line is bad, his receivers have been sub-par, his team sucks”, etc, which of course is not in favor of him at all. It’s merely shifting the argument away from what really matters, a la creationism.
Yes, Rodgers was put in a better situation, but Rodgers is also a part of that situation. He is the leader of a high-caliber, high-flying offense.
Meanwhile, all you can say for Smith is to point to a few random instances where he’s played OK, and then start plugging your ears and saying “nananana no OC no O-Line nanananana”.
by InTimmyWeTrust on Nov 12, 2009 9:26 AM PST up reply actions
Don’t lump all of the Smith supporters into one big group of people who think that Rodgers and Smith are equals.
I’m a Smith supporter. I even thought he was the better draft pick at the time. I still think that at the time, given the context we had, he was the better draft pick. Right now, though, Rodgers is the far superior quarterback in my opinion.
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 Nov 12, 2009 8:19 AM PST up reply actions
Sorry
By “Smith supporters” I guess I was referring to those that voted for him in the poll in the original post.
by InTimmyWeTrust on Nov 12, 2009 9:29 AM PST up reply actions
That's a useful clarification
Because I’m a major Smith supporter on this board … and I didn’t vote in that poll.
I'm with howtheyscored
I’m a Smith supporter and I think the argument in many of our cases is that the jury is still out. You lob out the pros and cons in the hopes that they make a case that the potential is there for Smith to outperform in the future. It’s better than thinking we’re dedicating the rest of our season to a Tim Rattay or Ken Dorsey….
Smith isn't bad but I think Rodgers is better
It was obvious sitting behind Favre in a no pressure situation for a few years helped Rodgers tremendously while Smith was out there in his rookie year starting but of course without much help on offense.
But let’s talk about now and I think Rodgers is the better QB of the two, you can count on him for 250 passing yards and 2 scores almost every game despite the crazy sack rate. I’m still not sure on what to expect from Smith yet, he can have the game of his life tonight (say 350 yards, 3 scores) or he let what happened against the Titans bother him and just flops on national TV (say 150 yards, 3 TOs) – either won’t be surprising to me.
There’s no doubt the 49ers are a better team now on offense so it’s up to Smith to step up; he has had a shot to lead the 49ers to wins during the late 4th quarter in the past 3 games but he’s came up short each time. That definitely has to change, he has got to either fire the team up before that critical last drive or simply make plays when it counts the most.
Win the inning.
I just want you guys to think
What if Rodgers and Smith switched places? Rodgers was selected by the 49ers as the number one pick and Smith slipped down to the packers. Where would both of these players be right now? Alex Smith would of had no injury problems, he would of had more time to develop as a drop back passer. Remember he had to learn how to drop back and take a snap. He would of had the same offensive system for many years. Alex Smith is really smart. He had top scores in the tests he had to take. He would of adapted the system and perfected it.
How would Rodgers of done being thrown into the fire?
How many times has Joe Montana thrown an interception in a super bowl?
I agree but..
it’s imposible to know for sure what would have happened if they switched places. All we can really do is look at how they play know. Rodgers, in my opinion, plays better than Smith if only for the fact he doesn’t seem to turn the ball over as much. I think Smith may yet turn into a solid QB much like Testeverdi and Plunkett who also stunk early in their careers, but the clock is ticking.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Interesting to think about
There is no doubt that Rodgers situation was more then favorable.
by packallday555 on Nov 19, 2009 10:44 PM PST up reply actions
i'm getting really sick of
the “different OC every year” argument. i dont care how new you are to the system, its not going to make you turn the ball over that much. otherwise shaun hill would have had the same problem.
Alex Smith makes better reads.
Alex Smith’s reads suck as much as anyone’s.
Aaron Rodgers seems to hold on to the ball way to long…
so does alex smith. its one of his trademarks.
I believe with Alex Smiths experience he surpasses Aaron Rodgers as a better quarterback.
i hope you’re joking.
As terrible as Smith has been so far this season during the pressure points of the games, he has played fairly decent and I feel comfortable with him as our quarterback.
why the hell would you be comfortable with a terrible quarterback under pressure?
I take full responsibility for my irresponsibility.
I dont think this is the first time
we have disagreed about Football, I think? I guess we just have different styles. But, maybe I was trying to say both of these quarterbacks suck equally, is that better?
How many times has Joe Montana thrown an interception in a super bowl?
Now its time to read and debate
Unless Rogers gets hurt against Dallas.
Please REC so we don’t have 8 fan posts Sunday afternoon about this same topic . . . please consider this the official debate leading up to the game.
Both these teams look evenly matched and the QB play will probably swing the game.
Alex Smith:
LOLine, running game, defense and a month to get acclimated.
Aaron Rogers:
LOLine, multiple receivers weapons, home field and years under the same system.
I'm going to be starting Rodgers for 2 of my FF teams...
I’m nervous.
Especially since I don’t keep QB backups on my bench.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Nov 15, 2009 12:40 AM PST up reply actions
It's in GB
Where all 49ers teams go to die. Even if they play well there will be a few bogus home town calls go the Packers way.
Not all.
But I agree about the hometown/awful calls. Those cost us regular season games there in 1996 and 2000. I’m happy that the Packers won today since the were not likely to lose three straight home games. Now our team gets to see them on film at their best and respect the challenge that his ahead. And there are certainly plenty of opportunities to sack Rodgers; that line is worse than ours and he holds the ball too long.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Dallas made sure of that
Already commented how I think Green Bay developed the Dallas game plan today. Sure fire way to lose to Green Bay and make them look good is to:
1. Pass in a spread formation the entire game
2. Throw screens/hitches to the WR while GB plays man, bumb coverage
3. Never try to run the ball
4. Do not defend the slant pass
5. Blitz the Green Bay offensive line up the middle
I concur
Our receivers have their biggest challenge of the season, including upcoming opponents. We’d do best to play it safer than the Tennessee game. And if their is more “spread” formations, let it be 2WR-2TE and run from that. Gore needs 25 carries to win in GB. Let our defense win field position with sacks and a turnover or two.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Haha nice analysis
The Cowboys passing pretty much the whole game was confusing too me. Barber started out pretty good, and then their Rb’s had 6 carries for 11 yards and they didn’t run the rest of the game.
Defending the slant passes is huge. Lots of teams don’t to it against us and for the life of me I can’t understand why, and Dallas was one of them.
We actually don’t play man coverage much anymore with the acquistion of the 3-4 defense. It’s more zone principles now. Dallas did try a few Rb screens against us but they were sniffed out by Jekins.
by packallday555 on Nov 19, 2009 10:49 PM PST up reply actions
Open receivers .. QB doesn't see them
A great example of Alex Smith’s imcompetence was on the last scoring drive against Chicago last week. On 3rd down, BOTH Davis and a WR were open in the end zone. Yet Alex locked onto the primary receiver and didn’t see the potential TD … Great QBs have great vision. Alex is who he is … just another average QB.
We’ve discussed the play where he missed Morgan in the end zone. Davis was not, in fact, open. Morgan was pretty open. But the play developed behind the line faster than it developed in the secondary, and Smith was smothered before he could make his reads.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 8:18 AM PST up reply actions
This.
Vision or no vision, a play is designed with a receiver in mind. You can’t blame Smith for looking at the primary receiver on what should be a quickly developing play and not having enough time to look the other direction for the secondary targets. That’s what makes the redzone so difficult to pass in, the speed at which the plays develop.
Alex Smith vs Aaron Rodgers?
Two good quarterbacks.
I am glad we have one of them.
My guess is that they will both be among the top 8 NFL quarterbacks in 3 years.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
- The hidden play of Super Bowl XLVI: Justin Tuck’s third-quarter sack
- Report: Chad Ochocinco will become Chad Johnson once again
- Video: Bill Belichick implores his defense to make the Giants throw to Mario Manningham
- Training Day: Learning the 40 with an Olympian
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
