Official Alex Smith [Over]Reaction Thread: Bears Edition
by howtheyscored on Nov 12, 2009 12:41 PM PST
396 comments
So here's the deal: In the interest of not having nine FanPosts in two hours after this game from people who simply have no other way to express a very important piece of their minds about Alex Smith's horrible/awesome/okay/weird performance in tonight's game on these boards, Fooch and I decided that it would be best to create a place for those discussions to take place.
So tonight, after the game, instead of making a brand new FanPost about how you feel Alex Smith played, please post here. Since we've created this official resource, we won't be hesitant to clean out extraneous threads that do get opened after the game. Post here. Ferreals.
And by way of extension, you can also use this thread to react to Frank Gore/Michael Crabtree/Vernon Davis/Scott McKillop/Etc.
But mostly Alex Smith. Boy, that guy had a good/bad/weird/okay/flukey game tonight. It's almost unbelievable how much one of those things he played!
And have fun with the poll.
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.
4 recs |
396 comments
Email
Print
Comments
i can tell you now
it will be a close game in the 4th quarter and alex smith will throw an interception in a big situation and we will lose. but this time i wont be shocked, considering it happens in every game he plays in
Chuck Norris has only lost in one thing. 1 on 1 with Monta.
by theoloukos on Nov 12, 2009 12:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
EVERY game?
Or did you mean more like this one?
At least during this game, he didn’t throw an interception!
I’m not saying it NEVER happens… But since you really have only three recent games to use as evidence, and one he had to try to recover from a 21 (later 24) point deficit before he ever threw his first pass, you might be overreacting a little.
But at the same time, I won’t necessarily be surprised either…
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
by JRPhillips on Nov 12, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If he could only have
2 halves of football equivelant to the 2nd half of this one
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
At least he's been better
than Shaun Hill. :-0
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 12, 2009 3:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
BUT HEZ NOT A WINNAR!!!!
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 12, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I shall be smote
For this here blasphemy.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 12, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Martz called Hill a WINNAR
He said the opposite of Smith.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 4:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
he also said he based his opinion on smith wen he was hurt so martz statement doesnt hold up
by BIG LOS on Nov 12, 2009 4:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was sorta being sarcastic
However, Martz did allude to Alex not being able to win a game yet this season.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 5:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
Check their records though, Hill is 10-6….even though Smith is more athletic, he is also more turnover prone. I think the Niners could have been like the Ravens when they won their superbowl with TRENT DILFER lol…our defense just hasn’t been doing the job, Dre Bly alone has dropped two pick 6’s that could have won the game against the Colts and the Vikings
by sanfranfanmdk on Nov 12, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the boo lol
I mean where is the ball-hawking we say in preseason where they would pick off anything in their vicinity? So far this season, they seem to drop balls that hit them between the numbers all the time
by sanfranfanmdk on Nov 12, 2009 3:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey
I don’t, and won’t, use QB W-L records as a stat to judge players. Smith has been better than Hill at passing the ball, which is what I’m judging him on, not how many long runs Frank Gore breaks or how well the defense plays.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 12, 2009 3:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
wrong
shaun hill has a winning record this year, better stats and doesn’t turn the ball over, obviously you know nothing about football
by mudewada on Nov 12, 2009 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
MUDEWADA
why can’t everyone think like you. Touche my friend
by theduke85 on Nov 12, 2009 11:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong
check the stats again…Smith’s are better..Comp%, YDS/GAME, TD’s, Less sacks, etc. Smith has done a very good job at stepping in. Hill had our team down and getting smoked 21-0… Now, me, personally…I put some of that on Jimmy. But if you’re being honest, Smith is doing better than Hill. Hill would havve lost those same games that we lost with Smith in there.
This team has a long way to go…
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This team has a long way to go…
Yep.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 7:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and how many wins does Alex have compared to Hill?
ya……….first win for Alex in a looooooooooong time.
by theduke85 on Nov 13, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said above
Hill would have lost those same games. When Sing put Smith in that first game, he almost pulled Hill’s butt outta the fire. So far Smith is 1-2 this year and Hill is 3-3, thats not exactly a huge seperation there. Not enough to be calling for Hill again. Smith should start the rest of the year. He’s finally got some weapons and a chance to do okay. If he fails and hasn’t done well by game 16, then we need to draft a QB pretty high.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I sincerely wish that we had some kind of built in website tool that would delete comments like these and warn the person who made them within a couple minutes of the post button getting hit.
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 13, 2009 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that would be awesome
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 13, 2009 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
DISAGREED
No chance he is. No F-ing way. Please explain to me how you think he is? I am curious…….because I can go for days on why it goes Shaun>Alex
by theduke85 on Nov 12, 2009 11:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t see how Shaun Hill would’ve done any better than Alex Smith, except maybe for the game against Tennessee. Hill would’ve been sacked twice as many times than Smith if he played, and probably fumbled as many balls as Smith has tossed to opponents.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 7:36 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL
I’ll give you sacks but predicting fumble rates is plain dishonest.
by bignerd on Nov 13, 2009 11:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not sure i agree there
predicting which fumbles are recovered by which team is pretty much impossible…
Over their careers,
Hill has been sacked 47 times and made 46 rushing attempts while fumbling 14 times.
So – 15.1% of the time he is hit he fumbles.
He also has a sack%+ of 86, which means he gets sacked 16% more than average.
Smith has been sacked 91 times and made 94 rushing attempts, while fumbling 29 times.
That’s a slightly higher fumble rate of 15.7%.. but a huge number of those fumble/sacks came in his rookie year (one of the worst QB years in the "DVOA era – since 1995)
His sack%+ is 83, which means he gets sacked 20% more than average.
This year, with the same OL, Smith has been sacked less than Hill. If you include runs (basically none of which are designed QB runs), Hill gets tackled (run+sack) on 13.6% of his drop backs, while Smith get tackled on 12%.
Now, this is not counting:
a) the fact that sacks are probably more likely to result in a fumble than a + yardarge run
b) sacks/runs where QB slides or runs OOB (no chance of fumble).
c) quality of opponents (since the sample size is that small)
d) change in OL (but I think this can be safely ignored… there have been changes but the line has been pretty uniformly terrible at pass blocking over both players tenure with the 49ers.
e) this only looks at RATE of fumbles, if the Niners pass less with Hill, and the sack % does not increase (not a given, since of course, lots of sacks occur on 3rd and Long) then it’s possilble that Hill could have a worse RATE of turnovers but actually turn the ball over less.
I think we can conclude from the above stats that there is probably not a significant increase in fumbles when you put in Hill for Smith… although if he put up a similar number of attempts, the increase in sacks from Hill might be significant.
Smith clearly throws more picks than Hill… the question is whether the YPA advantage makes up for it. So far this year, OVERALL Smith has been more effective (via DVOA) than Hill… although the stinker he put up last night is not going to help.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 13, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
...
i think i love you.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 13, 2009 4:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My point is you cannot predict multiple fumbles for a player in one game, outise Dave Kreig.
Seriously, the analogy he presented is as bad as saying the 49ers would have lost the Cardinals game because Alex would have thrown INT’s all over the place. Based off what?
by bignerd on Nov 14, 2009 1:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know you've arleady read this below this
I was generally just teasing about the fumbles
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 15, 2009 6:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I know you were. But a few other guys jumped in with stats and percentages who took the comment more serious than you.
by bignerd on Nov 15, 2009 10:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well
I was generally just teasing about the fumbles, but Hill wouldn’t have done any more than Smith that would have lead us to wins in the games we lost. Instead of throwing picks, his passes would’ve wobbled incomplete or he would’ve been sacked.
I like Hill, and wanted to see him as a full time starter, but if you recall the steel cage deathmatch fanpost, I’ve wanted Smith in as starter before the season began. Hill’s a fantastic back up, but when you can’t gameplan to your team’s best interests, it’s not a good thing.
Smith is more athletic and throws a much sweeter ball than Hill, even though he throws INTs. Hill has grit, and that’s about it.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I actually thought it was an interesting question... even though I was pretty sure you were just bagging on Hill
I don’t think there is much difference in fumble rate/hit for NFL QBs… so what really matters is how often he gets hit. Hill was sacked quite a bit more than Smith this year, so I would expect an increase in fumbles, but probably in no way offset the increased INTs.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no he'll fumble and throw interceptions all game long
you know alex smith is a loser, not because he’s not talented, he has talent but he has no charactor
by mudewada on Nov 12, 2009 6:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
to numbnuts
no character? Alex has been a winner all his life til SF. HS at Utah he lost 1 game in 2 years at Utah. ask Urban Myer about Alex’ Character. He was 4.0 student at hs and college. I’m wasting my time with a moron like you, idiots like you ruin blogs. you’re so dense this is a waste.
by bart00799 on Nov 13, 2009 6:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, that’s a little inappropriate. I understand you disagree, but name calling? I suspect you’re a little too old for that type of behavior.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
by JRPhillips on Nov 13, 2009 8:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
actually
he/she sounds kinda young, no? I find it difficult to believe that an adult could resort to such online behavior. But then again, I’ve seen my fair share of grownup buttholes in person…
by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Nov 14, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
patient gasshopper!
Here’s the scoop on Alex Smith as I see it. Let’s go back to another qb from the bay area. Jim Plunkett. He was a high draft choice after one of the greatest college careers ever. Which means he was with a bad team. The Patriots back then stunk he was going to be their savior. Instead he almost got killed by lack of a team around him to protect him etc. He was let got and went to the Raider bench waiting for another chance. Which came and also a superbow or 2. He was heathy finally and he had a good team around him. Alex was pretty much a lamb to the slaughter when he first came to The 49ers. !st over all pick no liine to block , almost got killed. Give the guy time to develop and for the team to develop around him. I’m still a Pats fan and we finally have a great owner, coach QB, and team around him. If your smart the 9ers will be the team to win win Alex. Because I beleve with a good team around him he’ll win.
by bart00799 on Nov 13, 2009 6:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't have time to wait
We have a playoff caliber team, a defense that is one of the best SF has seen in years and you want us to be patient with Alex who has already gotten a third, fourth and fifth chance. I WANT WINNERS! AND I WANT THEM NOW
by theduke85 on Nov 13, 2009 11:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We don’t have a playoff caliber team.
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 13, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
QB and we do, but I agree, not yet we don't.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 12:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, if we had Peyton Manning, maybe. But let’s be real. The receivers are still below average, the offensive line is ridiculously bad, and the secondary is still surprisingly thin on depth.
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 13, 2009 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If we had Peyton Manning, we’d be in a whole bunch of trouble. He’s got very little mobility, and I’m afraid our OLine would false start at every audible. If he ever got to snap the ball, he’d be sacked more times than a rapist at a self-defense class.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
prob right, OLine is bad right now.....
BUT….we have the OLine players on the roster to be a Playoff team. If you took the players on this roster, and gave us a top tier QB, I think we are a playoff team. The starters we have NOW, due to injuries maybe not so much.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
if we had a healthy pashos in at RT, and staley healthy at LT and a top tier QB, we’d be a playoff caliber team.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
unfortunately “top tier QB”s don’t grow on trees. And Smith is the best shot on our roster to become one in the next couple years.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 13, 2009 4:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Even just a top tier QB
Would easily make the Niners a playoff team.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 14, 2009 12:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no we don't
even our best possible OL combination isn’t very good. Slightly below average at best.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 13, 2009 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly have no idea about the eventual quality of our o-line
I know Snyder isn’t a tackle. I don’t know if he’s a career guard, or a career backup who has good value because he can play four positions on the line (very important when you only usually carry 2 backup linemen active on game day).
Rachal? It’s way too early to call him a bust, and he was pretty good against Indy. But what’s his ceiling? Backup? Barely-acceptable starter? Quality starter? Probably another year or two before we know for sure.
Staley I think is an above-average LT when healthy. Bass, I have no idea, seems fine. Heitman gets a lot of praise. But since Bass barely beat out Wragge, it seems weird to say that he’s definintely not the problem while Rachal is, you know?
by Ronaldinho on Nov 13, 2009 4:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Baas is pretty bad IMO
At least as a starter. He’d be a good backup.
Rachal is not very good but could be eventually, obviously we have to wait and see how much he develops.
Snyder is a backup. He shouldn’t be a starter.
Staley is average to above average as a left tackle. Good in pass protection, not so good in the run game.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 14, 2009 12:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well done Sir
Despite this proactive approach, I still put the over/under of reactionary Alex Smith Fan Posts at 2.5 for tonight.
If the 49ers should lose the Jimmy Raye or Mike Singletary reaction posts should be flying up also.
Here’s to not having a Drummer enjoyable game. You know the ones where the 49ers look inspiring while still losing, not that Drummer wants the team to lose.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 12:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
good use of over/under
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 12, 2009 12:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL, So will I
Most people who make those fan posts never comment on anything and probably don’t read this website often. Yet, after a game they log in and submit a one paragraph fan post in ALL CAPS.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 2:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Good Idea!
Way to think ahead and consolidate
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 12:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
After the way the FanPost section EXPLODED on Sunday, it seemed like the sensible thing to do.
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 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Man...and I thought I was negative...
Least ESPN guys, NFL network, etc. are all saying Niners victory…makes it an even scarier game as A. Smith has to do well to gain any level of respect from Niner faithful.
by 9erfan4vr on Nov 12, 2009 1:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think Gore will dominate this game
In addition to that, Alex Smith will be efficient and will do exactly what he needs to to help the team win. Being very efficient without turnovers, picking up some runs, and getting a couple of deep balls.
by fortyniners on Nov 12, 2009 1:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I just ask that when FalconOwn49ers and KORY SHEETS WAS OUR FUTURE make their awe-inspiring, reactionary GET YORK OUT/WE WOULDA WON WITH KORY SHEETS AND SHAUN HILL articles, please don’t delete them until I’ve had a chance to read and comment on them. Please?
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
by JRPhillips on Nov 12, 2009 1:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I’ll “consider” it.
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 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
you could also consider
not doing that…
by zacksf on Nov 12, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don’t make me beg. They’re like the highlight of my week!
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
by JRPhillips on Nov 12, 2009 1:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jason Hill:
Are we all thinking Jason Hill will get more time tonight?
I mean, Crabtree, Alex Smith, Brown, etc. (who did i miss). There is a pattern and method, right? We are developing young players.
by zacksf on Nov 12, 2009 1:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Since Bruce is out, I'm thinking yeah...
in fact, I’m rolling out a new avatar for the occasion!
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 2:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
no more morgan :(
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
by 49erLou on Nov 12, 2009 8:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
well, he simply didn't bust out
When he does, I’ll post it on game-day threads, though.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Howie
you really should make this an entire [OVER] Reaction thread. One for griping about Raye’s play-calling, Singletary’s time-management, Why Shaun Hill/Nate Davis/Michael Robinson should be in at QB, etc. etc. ect.
But good thinking, let’s hope it works.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 12, 2009 1:55 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I agree
If the 49ers lose tonight the Jimmy Raye mob is going to come out with torches and pitch forks no matter what happens in the game.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 2:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the 49ers lose tonite
It’ll be because of Smith moreso than Raye. But as far as I’m concerned they both can be burned at the proverbial stake.
Onward! To the castle keep!
The future ain't what it used to be.
by riderless on Nov 12, 2009 2:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Win or lose
I’ve already got the bolts placed on both sides of his neck and the tips of my pitch fork sharpened
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Jimmy Raye has done fine.
I was digging the mix of running plays tonight.
Draws, delays, sweeps, out of the shotgun etc etc…
It wasn’t bad play calling at all.
They just couldn’t stuff it in the endzone.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Nov 12, 2009 9:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OH MAN SMITH SUCKS
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Nov 12, 2009 2:20 PM PST reply actions 6 recs
OH MAN SMITH IS THE FUTURE
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Nov 12, 2009 2:20 PM PST reply actions 6 recs
There, I'm covered
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Nov 12, 2009 2:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed....
What is up with only handing off to a guy 13 times when he has over 90 yards with those 13 carries? One of the few times this year the Niners should have actually been running the ball more, and they decide to put it in the air so much and have 4 TO’s because of it.
by sanfranfanmdk on Nov 12, 2009 3:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hey--you got your wish!
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 8:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The problem is that those yards came late ...
Gore was very mediocre – an average of like 3 yards per carry – through the first three quarters. And then he broke that big run on the direct snap, and that changed things, and he ran up some decent yards on the final FG drive.
But he wasn’t running like that most of the game.
by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 9:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
last week he showed something, though.
Also, it’s nice to see him get his 2nd 100+ yard game this season, though, and he accounted for a ridiculous percentage of the total offense this game.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s normal to run the ball better late in a game. 3 yard runs in the 1st half become 7 yard runs in the 2nd half.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 9:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What? You serious?
with 8 minutes left you try and run out the clock with a 4 point lead? Great strategy…and don’t tell me it worked cause if it wasn’t for Cutler we would have gotten “destroyed” as Vernon put it
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What didn't work
Was trying to pass the ball. Did you watch the game? Did you notice they even tried to pass the ball on the last drive and got nothing but a shovel pass.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 9:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
ONCER
they tried to pass the ball ONCE on the last drive.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 12, 2009 9:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The tried twice. Smith had to scramble the second time and ran for two yards.
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 9:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It doesn’t change the overall point, though.
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 9:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
So despite getting nothing (I do mean nothing) in the pass game the entire 2nd half when they tried it’s the coordinators fault for not calling pass plays at the end of the game?
Anyone else find fault in this line of thinking?
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 9:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was just correcting him. I wasn’t trying to make any points. When I said “it doesn’t change the overall point, though” I was just saying that my correction didn’t change what Viliphied was saying. It just made it more correct.
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 9:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought so. I was responding to the chain.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 9:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yes. Yes it is.
How many passes were called in the 2nd half? Why did they stop going from the shotgun? That was working on that drive
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 12, 2009 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cause thats what Jimmy does
notorious for it
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yup. That I can agree on
With this line you’ve got to pass from the shotgun or you won’t be able to get anything done through the air.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 9:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Your perception is madly tweaked….I cannot wait until smiley man posts the play by play because its becoming more and more evident on why this offense has not been able to establish an identity
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
come on, don't be a tease
what’s your take on the matter?
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I already stated it in the thread
8 minutes left in the game and Raye starts taking a knee pretty much. This team has enough talent to put points on the board and Jimmy Raye just doesnt have the guts to pull the trigger
We have a decent QB
We have weapons at the WR position
We have the fastest TE and possible most versatile in the NFL
The line has played so-so the last few games
And…we have a really strong defense for the most part.
There is no reason other than a poor OC that we only put up 10 points on the Bears at home and our division rivals go to Soldier Field and drop 41 like its nothin. Yes, a little bit falls on the players but they’re only working with what is called. I hold Raye 80% responsible for this. It is not fun to watch this guy orchestrate the offensive weapons we do have
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I meant to add one of the best RB’s in the NFl too…with all that, how do you fail. OC…thats how. The majority anyway
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
did you feel that way last week?
I thought that was pretty entertaining.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so it's spread or die as far as you're concerned?
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought the TItans game was really good
This game was piss poor
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 9:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When Raye
came out and stated to the world “WE WANT TO RUN THE BALL 60/40” …I knew we were in trouble then. And after as well, when he tried to veer from the comment and said “Well what I meant to say…is….run it when we want to”. Who doesn’t right?
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
what I don't get
is why Raye doesn’t think using Gore as the ‘bell cow’ doesn’t extend to the pass game. The reason I liked what he did last game was that he did involve Gore there—to the tune of 75 rec yards and 83 rush yards. Sure, you don’t want to make Alex Smith need to win the game for you, but still.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He
just isn’t consistent from game to game or from drive to drive and especially from quarter to quarter. Something starts to work and then he’s gets ADD and goes with something else. Its Chess not Checkers Jimmy… If you got em on the run, keep em on the run
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you see the Texans start giving the ball to Steve Slaton to run the ball after they found out that Daniels was going to be effective or did their OC keep going to Daniels?
Did Manning stop going to Wayne against us when he noticed that that was the only thing working? Hell no.
Jimmy just gets away from what is working. I agree with the Gore comment. He had 4 catches for 21 yards and half of it was on one play… He just doesnt create enough 1 on 1 mismatches. You ever notice when Crabtree catches the ball there’s like at least 2 guys there…at the very least 2 guys there?
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I just remember seeing Arizona
tear apart the bears secondary. The underneath routes were open all day vs the Bears. This forced their secondary to play back which allowed AZ to get 182 yards on the ground, when going into the game they were dead last.
Interestingly enough this year they’re running two different coordinators—running and passing. I dunno how they’re deciding which way to go, but they’re looking pretty good the last couple of games.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 10:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Early in the season, it seemed the run blocking was better than the pass blocking. But now the holes are just not there consistently for Gore, so use him more as a receiver.
by silverjay on Nov 12, 2009 9:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The holes weren't really there at the beginning of the season
He had two big runs against the Seahawks and that was really it.
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Nov 12, 2009 10:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That's okay
The running game is meant to run well late after wearing people down and/or backing them off thru the passing game.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 12:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Great idea...
I’m gonna steal the idea and do this for our Lovie Smith/ Ron Turner/ Jerry Angelo haters out there.
Probably won’t work though…
You are all gentlemen (and ladies) and good judges of cheap whiskey.
by Dane Noble on Nov 12, 2009 2:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
great idea
not gonna work
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 12, 2009 3:20 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
It works because we get to delete excess threads. Hooray for power!
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 3:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m going to create one now just so I can get it deleted, then complain to anyone who will listen that the mods deleted my meaningful thread for absolutely no reason.
It’s going to be AWESOME!
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
by JRPhillips on Nov 12, 2009 3:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Updated
I’ve added Jimmy Raye and the offense as a whole into the title. It’s rather all-engrossing, but we’re doing this to prevent a flood of similar FanPosts after the game.
by Fooch on Nov 12, 2009 3:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
but then we run the risk of this just being a generic after-game thread
I think it works better as a “quarterback thread” and have a separate “coaching/offense thread”
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 12, 2009 4:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
good point
Maybe people will be kind enough to keep coach/offense stuff in the recap thread.
by Fooch on Nov 12, 2009 4:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Have I told you lately that I loved you?
Extremely proud adoptive parent of Paul E. Stanley, deserved all-star and hacker extraordinaire
Thanks to roger
I've never been happier to have Crabs
by bondslegend on Nov 12, 2009 4:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
of course maybe
Smith will play great and the offense will click and we’ll score 35 points and nobody will freak out
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 12, 2009 4:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I give Smith an incomplete.
Crabtree looked good.
Gore looked good.
Smith looked … like he barely got to throw, and when he did he was running away from sacks.
Everybody else on the offense looked awful.
Just awful.
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 8:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I agree with this.
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Nov 12, 2009 10:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Stat lines
Alex Smith—16/23 for 118 yards no INT, no TD
Frank Gore—25 carries for 104 yards, 1 TD
Michael Crabtree—4 catches for 48 yards
Josh Morgan—3 catches for 24 yards
Vernon Davis—3 catches for 16 yards
And the best stat of all—Aubrayo Franklin records his first INT of his career.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 8:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Alex Smith
got an INT, if I remember.
Underthrew it to Crabtree early on a deep pass.
by brundylop on Nov 12, 2009 8:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I really really hope Jimmy Raye is not here next year
I dont care if it means another OC in how many ever consecutive years
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 8:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
If it's any consolation
our 3rd down percentage was the best it’s been all years.
Though we only put up 216 yards in total offense which is pathetic.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 8:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Raye was brilliant tonight
We had no receivers getting open, couldn’t pass block . . . absolutely no pass game to mention and he dialed up a bunch of trick running plays that all worked.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 8:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that direct snap was pretty cool
49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha
by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 12, 2009 8:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No delay of game against us
That’s got to be an improvement, right?
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 8:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh whatever
Raye is horrible… you can’t know who was open and who wasnt downfield. Raye is horrible…I have said it all year and I will be relentless until he is fired. He needs a rocking chair, a glass of whiskey, and a stogie + retirement. The 80’s are over…that playbook needs to be burnt along with his irresponsible playcalling. No shots downfield….didnt try and get VD going..etc. How many teams just sit on it with 8 minutes left in the 4th with only a 4 point lead?
Jimmy Raye is a joke
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 8:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They did take shots downfield
Take for instance, that Alex Smith interception intended for Crabtree.
by brundylop on Nov 12, 2009 8:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
nothing really
that particular interception didn’t cost them anything, it was kind of like a punt. the bears got it back around the 20…and then cutler ended up throwing an INT too, and that ended in Gore’s TD, so all’s well that ends well
Now if that other interception hadn’t gotten overturned by the penalty on the bears, that would have sucked…i think Smith was somewhere near the 50 yd line at that point.
by sleepyotter on Nov 12, 2009 9:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Crabtree's fault
and 1? out of how many passes? You think if Peyton Manning throws a pick, their OC is going to put his tail between his legs? Seriously doubt it. How is Alex ever going to gain confidence. He can get it down there accurately. Raye is crippling Smith
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't confuse them
Alex ain’t Peyton, and even if he gets a confidence transfusion from Vernon Davis, he ain’t gonna be Peyton.
by silverjay on Nov 12, 2009 9:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's an example to make a point
I didn’t say Smith is the next Manning
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I grasp your point
My point is that Raye is trying to win with the QB he has, not the QB he’d like to have. (I can’t believe I’m sounding like Rummy now.)
by silverjay on Nov 12, 2009 9:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He
has enough weapons to make it work…and a balance of weapons RB, TE, WR’s. There are teams that have to work with a lot less. I also think Alex could be a better QB with an OC who knew how to play to his strengths better.
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Are you the guy who thinks this is 30 point offense?
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 10:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Do we have the potential?
I think we do… How many point did we score last week? 3 shy of 30 right? I’m not saying every game but it is certainly possible against a crappy D like the Bears. If the Cards can throw down 41 in Soldier Field and we drop a whopping 10 I don’t know how you can defend the OC at all. Not one bit. That 4th quarter was ridiculous. The whole game really but the enire end of the game I was hoping Sing would have gone up to that box and send Raye to the showers early like he did with VD last year
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 10:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We have two Pro-Bowl calibre players on offense
How many teams can say that?
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 10:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Only a few...
Possibly a 3rd in Crabtree… and there is still time for Smith to put it together also.
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 10:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah that would be sweet
49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha
by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 12, 2009 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You can’t really count the fifth turnover.
I want me some Buster
by gbears16 on Nov 13, 2009 1:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wha?
Maybe not in terms of points off turnovers, but it came in the endzone to thwart the Bears final drive.
But I think you mean points off turnovers, so I’ll agree.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 7:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Lance Briggs had something to do with VD not getting open.
There was a shot taken down field, do remember Alex’s one INT?
They didn’t sit, they had no one getting open. A few of those 3rd down run play calls were brilliant.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 8:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
A shot.
You can’t just abandon it because it burns you once. 10-15 yards is Smith’s bread and butter, and what do we call twice on 3rd and 10+? Bubble screens.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 12, 2009 9:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought he called a *great* game against the Titans
I haven’t seen this one yet, but the performance last week had me pretty well convinced; he was working play action, end arounds, multiple different screens to the TE and HB. Seriously, though, 3 passes for 16 yards to VD?
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t watch this one if I were you. Just be happy with the win and imagine that it wasn’t actually disqualified from the ugly win contest because they don’t let professionals compete.
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 9:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He is inconsistent
bignerd will tell you that Mad Max Lance Briggs put the glove on Davis as if thats possible
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ya, journeyman Lance Briggs
Maybe you should look the guy up.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 9:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
VD is truly infuriating
he throws them that bulletin board material earlier in the week and gets called for 2 false starts—again—and this guy’s a captain. Too bad the announcers just latch onto the ‘redemption of Vernon Davis’ angle all the time, that drives me crazy.
Don’t get me wrong, I love his talent, but what I wouldn’t give to find a lobotomizer that didn’t affect football skill.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If we promote Johnson or get Turner then the offense won’y change too much just the play calling
I want me some Buster
by gbears16 on Nov 12, 2009 8:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't that the point?
We have some players and there were a few moments in the first half when I was impressed with the feel and the calls, but that disappeared until the last drive. Even that only gained 40 or 50 yards. I think the same players, with the same plays, could achieve more with a different playcaller.
by NH49er on Nov 13, 2009 11:48 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it has almost nothing to do
with the play CALLING at this point. I mean, Raye has tried every possible angle from run-run-draw-punt to shotgun-shotgun-shotgun-punt… but the players are not executing.
I assume 80% of the problem is the OL, which other than the 4th Quarter last night can’t run block, and generally cannot pass block. I think some of the issues in the passing game are due to max-protect scheme which only have 2 guys + outlet running real routes.
It’s possible that that players:
a) STILL aren’t good at Raye’s system
b) are not suited to it.
Other than the OL, I think b) is not a factor, because frankly Raye has tried everything.
I actually think because the OL is so bad, they’d be better off with a Micheal Vick or Vince Young type QB.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 13, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This last game, there were a few things I noticed about the playcalling.
1) It looked much worse than it was because we were in so many 3rd and Long situations.
2) We put ourselves in a lot of the 3rd and Long situations by either: losing yards on second down because of a breakdown at the line or committing a penalty that drove us back from a 3rd and Manageable.
I really do agree that execution and penalties were the biggest factors in our offensive problems this last game. We rarely put Raye in a position where the down and distance gave him a lot of choice on how conservative to be. There are only so many things you can do on 3rd and Long as a playcaller, and no matter what you do the percentages are overwhelmingly against you. When we did have 3rd and Manageable, a false start or a hold came like clockwork. It was unbelievably bad execution.
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 13, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Also: I thought that we had the most success running the ball when we sold the possibility of the pass. Shocking, I know. A few times out of shotgun, Smith kind of took a half-step into his throwing position before handing to Gore. One of those went for like 15 yards and I didn’t see any go for negative yardage. The few times I saw them run that draw without Smith doing that, it was negative every time.
However, almost every time we ran out a formation with two tight ends and a fullback, it didn’t end well.
That’s not groundbreaking, I know, but if there was only one thing I would ask Raye for, it would be to call more runs that at least look like they could possibly be passes.
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 13, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
why oh why
did we stop running that halfway through the drive? It was working so well, I thought they were setting up a medium-deep pass, but then they go back under center and it’s up the middle for -1-2 yards again.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 13, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats maybe the problem
Consistency and continuity is a pretty important factor in the NFL. If Raye is calling this here and that there with no reason,10 times out of 10 you’re going to have major glitches in your ability to be effective.
Raye’s most glaring issue is that when something starts to work, he jumps ship and then goes to something else. Most successful OC’s do not abondoned things when they’re working. If you find a weakness in a defense you exploit it, exploit it, and exploit it some more until they can stop it. It’s called common sense, something that may have left Raye a couple to few years ago. The guy is like 65 and is not getting any younger.
Michael Vick: He should be available next year but do you really want a guy that has a career comp % of 50%? Maybe as a backup that’s be cool but other than that, I am not so sure it’d be the best option. I am more for getting guys on the OL if you’re going to spend the money
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Raye’s most glaring issue is that when something starts to work, he jumps ship and then goes to something else
I’m not sure how true that is, but I also think it’s not a big negative. An OC’s job is to keep the defense honest, and guessing. If Raye kept calling the same stuff over and over again, our team would be even worse in number of 3 and outs.
I may be one of the few, but I’ve found that Raye’s playcalling has been improving since Alex Smith took over.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
It is true…
Did the Texans stop using Owen Daniels against us cause it worked a few times? That doesn’t make any sense what you’re saying as an argument to what I said in this:
Most successful OC’s do not abondoned things when they’re working. If you find a weakness in a defense you exploit it, exploit it, and exploit it some more until they can stop it.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I dodn't say do everything in a row
For instance, if you exploit a weakness in a secondary you force them to make the adjustments and once yoiu’ve done that then you go with something else that you’ve found to work.
He doesn’t do that. He just calls whatever whenever cause he “thinks” it might work
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the only problem
is that nothing has consistently worked for the 49ers yet, save for a two-minute drive here and there. the most consistent play calling has been the hand off to Gore.
the Texans kept throwing to Daniels because he was always open. that’s not just on the OC’s play calling, that’s also on the QB seeing the TE running open.
Last night, Raye called a slant play that registered a first down. When he called the same slant play again, Alex Smith just stared at the open receiver and took a sack.
It’s not all on Raye man, honest.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think that is an obvious statement that it’s not ALL on Raye. Of course the players are partially responsible in certain scenarios. I dont have unrealistic expectations in that EVERYTHING should work. But its my opinion from what I have watched and analyzed that most of it falls on Jimmy Raye.
If I was Alex Smith, I’d just start calling my own stuff and changiong plays in the huddle like Jim McMahon did back in the day
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the Texans kept throwing to Daniels because he was always open. that’s not just on the OC’s play calling, that’s also on the QB seeing the TE running open.
The OC kept calling plays that he knew Daniels would be open in…how can you not acknowledge that?? You are in total denial if you think that Jimmy Raye is even close to being ranked in the top half of the OC’s in the NFL right now. I would say he is in the bottom tier of all of the OC’s in the NFL.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
when did I ever say
Raye was in the top half of the OCs in the NFL?
we couldn’t cover Daniels, what part of that don’t you get? It doesn’t take a genius to call a route that will get Daniels open if no one can cover him. We’ve struggled against TEs all year long for the most part.
yeah, the Texans co-ordinator did a good job calling plays that instructed Owen Daniels to go for a pass instead of stay in to block, but calling routes that he knew Daniels would get open on? Are you serious? Daniels could’ve run a “just get open” route and it would’ve worked.
And again, don’t assume I think Raye is in the top half of the league, I never once said that. I’m just saying he’s not as bad as you seem to think he is, nor are you willing to budge from that stance.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
when did I ever say Raye was in the top half of the OCs in the NFL?
You’re defending him like he’s actually good. This offense has some deadly weapons and they’re not being used very methodically.
we couldn’t cover Daniels, what part of that don’t you get? It doesn’t take a genius to call a route that will get Daniels open if no one can cover him. We’ve struggled against TEs all year long for the most part.
What part don’t you ge that their OC didn’t stop calling plays to him because we couldnt cover him? Raye would have abondoned in their scenario and started calling runs to Slaton or something. Thats the difference between a guy who is competent and one who isn’t. Thats a pretty easy concept. Not sure why its so difficult to grasp.
And he is absolutley as bad as I think he is. If he’s not in the top half, then why would you or anyone want to keep him? That makes zero sense.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Raye has yet to have a situation
where a player was constantly getting open and he abandoned throwing in that player’s direction.
See: Vernon Davis 7 catches, 93 yards, 3 TDs versus Houston
See: Vernon Davis 10 catches, 102 yards, versus the Titans
Most of the time, Raye does not have the luxury of the offense continually executing. Frank Gore scored on long TD runs against the Seahawks on the exact same run plays. Raye knew it would work, and didn’t abadon it.
Last night Gore had 25 carries in the game, because he was the most effective on offense last night. Raye didn’t abandon that. In fact, we had 10 run plays in our final 4th quarter drive out of the 12 plays called. If it weren’t for crappy protection on the final pass play, the drive looked pretty darn good, because he stuck with what was working.
I don’t want the team to abandon Raye even though he’s not a top half OC in the league, because we need continuity in our offense before we start blaming the OC on such a bad job. I haven’t seen Raye abandon things as often as you think he has, and that’s the honest truth. I’m not defending him like he’s awesome, or super duper, I’m defending him because while our team may have weapons, they fail in the art of execution.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 2:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Raye has yet to have a situation where a player was constantly getting open and he abandoned throwing in that player’s direction.
How could you possibly know that?
I see everything that you are explaining most of all on Raye himself. You blame the players for the majority. Consistency, IMO, should fall in there somewhere and if players arent comfortable with something cause of hairbrain playcalling then I think that shouldnt be put totally on them and a majority on the guy who’s being inconsistent in making them not feel comfortable.
And then you go on to somewhat contradict yourself with the Vernon example you gave…
This convo is a lost cause. You obviously think Raye has got what it takes. I, on the other hand, strongly disagree. Thats where we’re at so…prob best to agree to disagree about this topic.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 2:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And then you go on to somewhat contradict yourself with the Vernon example you gave…
Wait, because I showed an example of how Raye didn’t abandon play calls to Davis when he was getting open, I contradicted myself? I’m not saying the players don’t ever execute, I’m saying there’s been very few times that the team has had something that was working that Raye just up and abandoned for no reason.
I’m with you, we can agree to disagree. And I’m kind of disappointed you didn’t post a picture of Shrek in the process.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 2:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol….Shrek? Not sure I get it… oh well.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 2:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i think Jimmy Raye
kinda looks like Shrek, except 100 years older.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 2:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
How could you possibly know that?
I guess under that line of thinking I should blame Fooch for your post and not you.
by bignerd on Nov 13, 2009 2:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I have been thinking about this a bit
the problem with giving too much credit/responsibility to the OC is that the players – particularly the QB must recognize the defense and it’s weaknesses and attack it. This seems to me to be one of the huge differences between watching the Pats/Colts game tonight and watching the 49ers on offense (since about… 2001).
Even if the OC selects a good play for a given situation and defense, the defense can change out of it. But the offense always has the last say in what the final play is.
I don’t think Smith (or Hill) has the experience/skill reading defenses yet to really be superlative, and giving him a weak OL is not helping.
How would you even rank OCs? You can rank offenses. If you are Football Outsiders you can rank skill players and OL units… what is your measurement of what a good OC is?
Raye seems to me to be fairly average… but given that’s he’s got a useless OL and a team for 1/2 a season, maybe he’s a genius.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My big issue with Raye
is that he runs plays that are poorly conceived and designed. I’ll have some highlights in Monday’s play-by-play, but several of his blocking schemes just won’t work.
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
wait a minute...
after the first couple of games, the problem was that he was too conservative and just ran the ball all the time… then he mixes it up and you call him out for being inconsistent?
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Inconsistent
meaning abandoning things that are working in an in game situation. If our offense exploits the defense…it’s been pretty obvious and pretty consistent that he starts trying other stuff and never comes back to it. Its almost like he has alzheimers at times, and I am not saying that to be funny or anything. My Grandfather died of that disease but all I am saying is that it seems completely inconsistent in that he abandons what is working….ALOT
by Drew K on Nov 15, 2009 10:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I thought that was the defense adjusting
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
216 yards offense
Even with all the Bears penalties and turnovers they still managed 350 yards
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 8:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
One scoring drive was 14 yards and when teams get turnovers they usually do not need as many yards of offense but i agree the niners need more yards to beat better teams
I want me some Buster
by gbears16 on Nov 12, 2009 8:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Bears also really aired it out
They threw almost twice as much as we did. Plus there were those two huge screens to Forte that burned us big time.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 8:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're starting to sound like Rocky123456789
If you start calling for the head of Manusky we’ll have to send the rescue squad over.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 9:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I dont know who
Rocly328478320480 is but there are a ton of people that want Jimmy Raye’s head. Manusky is doing a fantastic job so I am not even sure what you mean by that
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
JIMMY RAYE
ARIDFSODJGERWPFEIFS.
I think after Smith’s int. someone told Raye that Singletary put Hill back in.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 12, 2009 8:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
One more thing, Punt Return . . . zOmg awful
The Bears kicked the ball out of the end zone and 49ers offense took possession at their own 15 yard line.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 8:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We've got to find somebody who can return a punt
our return game is killing us.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 8:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
is 5 yards per punt return
too much to ask for nowadays?
by brundylop on Nov 12, 2009 8:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hey, Hester averaged 2 yards a punt return.
Of course I still don’t understand why the Niners cut Rossum, but whatever.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Alex Smith
is 1-0 on Thursdays this season! WINNARRRR
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
by 49erLou on Nov 12, 2009 8:54 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
We just need the NFL to reschedule the rest of our games
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 8:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
thursdays FTW!
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
by 49erLou on Nov 12, 2009 8:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you see the stat
Niners franchise is 7-1-1 on Thursdays. Who knew…
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 1:16 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
give the poor guy an offensive line
Adam Synder struggled in pass blocking, again.
Go 49ers
by iaalexeeff on Nov 12, 2009 9:11 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Fixed it.
Adam SynderOur offensive linemen struggled inpassblocking, again.
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 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They did decent enough
Smith sacked only 2 times and Gore got 104 yards. Not to mention the puch they got into the endzone when Gore decided to cut back to the right and not following the push in the endzone to the left.
Raye is just horrible thats what it boils down to
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If Shaun Hill had been in
It would’ve been a lot more than 2 sacks. Smith did a pretty good job escaping the rush.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 9:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Smith
avoided some heat at times. I like that he rolls out when he can. Sometimes I feel like he can throw it to receivers when he throws it out of bounds but I think he will get better at knowing when he can and cannot throw that ball
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 9:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The first (second?) drive into the red zone is a good example
It looked like he had Morgan open but was too worried about taking the sack and threw it away instead.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 9:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
EXACTLY
Even my GF was like, that guy was wide open, why didn’t he throw it to him? I couldn’t even answer it. Was like, uh I think he panicked and didn’t see him. She was like, he sucks. LOL.
It’s funny hearing an outside opinion of Smith from someone that has no clue his background, or what he has been through.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That was a completely broken play. Morgan was open, but everything else was falling apart. I don’t know how much we can really call any one individual out for that TD not happening.
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 13, 2009 10:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with howie
I remember the play, and smith really didn’t have time to make an accurate pass anywhere but through the back of the end zone.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 10:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
If he tries to force it while stumbling he could get sacked (thus a longer FG) or make a horrible throw that could get picked. He did the smart thing. I think he slipped and was pressured quickly but had he not slipped he may have avoided the pressure and threw the TD anyway.
What would’ve been nice was better run blocking on 2nd and goal from the 1. Then the pass would never have happened.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or a better play call like a play fake to the TE
Since we never see that play
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 13, 2009 8:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
WE'RE A POWER RUN TEAM!!!
The best part of a power run strategy is that you know it’s coming and you still can’t stop it!
You have been DFiBrillated.
by Dubs fan in Boston on Nov 15, 2009 5:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
With our O-line, roughly 50% of the plays look like that
Are we to plan on all plays that ‘break down’ as failures? Ouch. I was defending Smith earlier this week and I’m still pulling for him, but I think that was the worst play of the game for him (much worse than the INT). He has to have that play. Things break down once in a while and he has to keep his head.
by NH49er on Nov 13, 2009 11:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He made some very nice plays when his protection broke down. I distinctly remember a first down pass to Crabtree in the first quarter where he evaded the first wave after the O-Line politely stepped aside for Chicago’s DL, rolled out to his right, and then threw a seed to Crabtree on the run with another defender bearing down on him.
So he threw the ball away on one particular play when things broke down. He made something out of nothing on plenty of others. Please don’t use this one play as a be-al end-all example for the way he has responded to a heavy pass rush this season because it’s disingenuous and inaccurate.
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 13, 2009 12:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with NH49er
He has to make that play. I don’t think he is using that one play as the be all, end all example, however, I think there was no reason he shouldn’t have made that play. I just don’t think he was looking downfield because Vernon and Morgan were open. GREAT QBs are always looking downfield at all times.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Vernon was not open. Morgan was definitely open.
Listen, I can see the point. Morgan was open in the end zone. If Smith gets to that read, it should be a TD 10/10 times. Unlike you, though, I really don’t know that he had the time to get to the point in his progression. The play developed very, very quickly, I believe he slipped on the play (again, the field was in visibly awful shape), and he had defenders breathing down his neck from the front and the back.
I really don’t think it’s as simple as “Morgan was open and he should have seen it.” I really don’t.
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 13, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
this
and I hardly ever use the “this” feature.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Davis was open.
Not WIDE open like Morgan. However, it was a doable throw if he was in the pocket. Having him rolling out however, I wouldn’t have wanted him to make it, could it of been made, yes. But since I wouldn’t have wanted him to make it, I’ll give it to you on Davis.
Morgan should have been made. I get it that the play developed quickly. But not THAT quickly. He slipped a little, and I think that is what threw his timing off and why he wasn’t looking downfield. As soon as he slipped, he started looking at the line. Had he been looking downfield that was a makable through, and he HAS to be looking downfield at all times. He had time to make the throw and should have.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 1:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i'd have to look at a replay before I could blame Smith
Who and where was his primary receiver? How close was the pass rush?
INTs happen when a QB thinks he sees someone open on the opposite side of the field and throws without having time to make sure. On the other hand, if Morgan was the primary receiver, that’s a bigger concern …
by Ronaldinho on Nov 13, 2009 10:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Play was to his side of the field
NOBODY within 10 yards of Morgan. To me, it looked iike a play he should have, and HAS to make.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 12:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It almost looked
like the play last week that he fired to Jason Hill in the back of the endzone
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
minus the pressure and frantic
collapsing of the pocket and crappy field conditions and everything Howie’s already mentioned.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hill's TD
came on a collapsing pocket and a ton of pressure. Smith’s shoulder pads were hanging out of his jersey at the end of the play.
At least that’s the TD that I think Drew K is talking about
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 1:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i think so too
I think the difference between the two is that on the Hill TD, Smith had a clearer field of vision, I’m not convinced he saw Morgan.
Also, early in the play, Morgan was covered nicely, he didn’t come open until the play had already begun to break down, so if Morgan was the primary read on that play, Smith had probably already moved on in his progression
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 13, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thing is about that play......
A sack wouldn’t have really hurt the Niners, figuratively at least. Making Nedney’s kick a few yards longer in that situation shouldn’t have been a big deal relative to being sure you took all your chances at the end zone, would have been reasonable FG yardage in almost any event.
But no, you really can’t kill him on that play.
by Stoned Slacker on Nov 13, 2009 9:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not only did Smith
do a good job escaping the rush.. But had Hill been in there, they wouldn’t have been in the shotgun quite as much.
So you could have seen like 5 sacks with Hill in there.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Nov 12, 2009 10:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not for one play in the first half and one drive in the fourth quarter. But for the other 24 minutes they were on the field, hell yeah they sucked.
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 13, 2009 8:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think this was Alex Smith's Shaun Hill game.
It will make me laugh if all the Hill supporters claim that this game somehow shows that Smith sucks, because Smith basically cloned Shaun Hill on this game. Lots of safe passes, decent completion percentage but mediocre YPA. Few shots downfield. No huge mistakes. A few smart plays in the face of a big pass rush.
And, of course, a win.
Not an inspiring game from Smith, but at the moment I don’t feel like looking a gift horse in the mouth.
by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 9:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
He'z a Winnar now!
Would have won last week too with a Shaun Hill performance.
by bignerd on Nov 12, 2009 9:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
doubtful.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
by Viliphied on Nov 12, 2009 9:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
doubtful indeed
Hill wouldn’t have been able to make many of the throws that were in the game plan last week. He would’ve made other ones, but not the specific ones the plays last week were designed to need simply weren’t in Hill’s arsenal.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I was going to post something like this but he said if Smith would have had a Hill-like performance which means Smith still would have been able to make the throws. I do agree with you about Hill though
I want me some Buster
by gbears16 on Nov 12, 2009 9:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Exactly right; last week when they showed the Alex Smith vs. Vince Young graphic I was somehow surprised by how similar their stats were; almost down the line they were nearly identical! When I read VY’s stat line the week earlier (15/18 125 or thereabouts) I was thinking ‘wow, that coaching staff really protected Vince’. So maybe the Niners were doing the same thing with Smith this week.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 12, 2009 9:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
In the slightly modified words of Scar
“Run away, Alex. Run away, and never return”
Wall-E for Best Picture 2008
2009: The return of Los Galacticos!
by Useful_Idiot on Nov 12, 2009 9:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
hey at least he didn't throw 5 picks
CUTLOLER!
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
by 49erLou on Nov 12, 2009 10:17 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Cutler KILLED me in fantasy this week.
I didn’t have anyone else to start really. I should have known better though as the NIners have done a pretty solid job shutting down other QBs.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 9:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Alex Smith
is off to one of his better starts in his career…
After tonight: 79/122 (65%), 808 yards, 6 TD 6 INT *(3 in 1 game)
The completion rate is much improved from years previous. Some of the INT’s have taken weird bounces and or have not totally been all on him.
Tonight he was a game manager but that has alot to do with the plays that were called (He was 70% in his completion rate so I am not sure why we werent passing more). I am still sort of unsure on how to feel about Smith but I am leaning more and more toward trusting him to be the QB of this team. I don’t want to get ahead of myself, so I’ll leave it at that for now. He still has a season and a half to show us if he has it or not.
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 11:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
not to be a debbie downer here but....
you could also put an asterisk by his 6 TD’s and say 3 in one half. you have to mix the good and bad. and personally i think that he has half a season to show us whether he has it or not, not a season and a half. but that’s just me. But i’m all for him the rest of this year, he really does give us our best opportunity to win
by Camraman926 on Nov 12, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True about the TD's...
I am most impressed with the comp % right now. It means his accuracy is getting better
by Drew K on Nov 12, 2009 11:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a little baffled by why the offense was so ineffective tonight
Smith wasn’t bad. Might have been overcommitment to the running game in the first half, although that paid off later. Ill timed penalties were part of it, too.
by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 11:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
meant to write smith wasn't THAT bad.
There was also a missed FG in there, which makes things look a little worse than they were.
by Ronaldinho on Nov 12, 2009 11:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They had better rhythm in the first half
But only had four possessions.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 1:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Smith has done pretty good
But he’s got this season to prove himself or we’ll be drafting a QB.
I think it’s time for Raye to go. I’ve been willing to give him time but I’m watching the game right now and it’s not just the types of plays he calls, it’s the way they’re designed. I’ll have more in the play-by-play (which won’t go up until Monday morning), but part of the problem with our LOL line is the way the plays are designed.
by smileyman on Nov 12, 2009 11:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Alex Smith
has done pretty good? What? for Pop Warner? He is as awful as he always was. No natural instincts = indecision = slow delivery = awful.
Kezarvet
by kezarvet on Nov 13, 2009 5:02 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I'd say awful=5 picks
Awful≠69% completion percentage. Maybe he didn’t throw us into the game, but he didn’t throw us out of it. And isn’t that the recipe for a smashmouth football team?
There comes a point at which formulas like
No natural instincts = indecision = slow delivery = awful.sound remarkably dogmatic.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 7:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you copy/paste this from something you said on Monday?
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 13, 2009 8:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
hey, I've reposted a couple of times myself
And I think that’s legit if a comment hasn’t been responded to or if it’s particularly on point in a new context.
But the fact (and it is a fact) that this is a repost when a game has been played in the intervening period strengthens my point that this assertion is dogma—an article of faith that is not subject to falsification by new evidence. If you’re that kind of fan (and aren’t we all to some extent?—witness my abiding conviction that Smith may yet be a good QB), that’s ok. But at what point does watching the games cease to matter—and at what point are you just relying on first impressions?
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 9:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
correction
Dogma – Funny movie starring Jay and Silent Bob.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 10:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
lol
I love that (my fellow Canadian) Alanis Morisette played God in that movie. Awesome.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 11:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I like Morisette in that movie, but I’m ashamed to admit she’s Canadian. Isn’t it ironic?
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
isn’t it ironic that nothing mentioned in that song is actually ironic? Things like “rain on your wedding day” aren’t ironic, they’re like when the QB you gave up 3 draft picks plus what now looks like a decent QB who wasn’t used properly—when the QB you traded for throws 5 picks in one game. That’s not ironic that’s crappy.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 2:51 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I think the Bears probably still make that trade honestly
Cutler is still a good player, he just doesn’t have talent around him. QB’s who are as good as he was last year at age 25 are pretty special.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 14, 2009 12:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
wow
I had never heard this.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
i think we should keep raye for one more year too many different playbook and schemes every year cant make us ne better with a new off cord
by BIG LOS on Nov 13, 2009 1:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I think they are planning to promote from within if Raye is let go
I want me some Buster
by gbears16 on Nov 13, 2009 1:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
even if they do so, why not keep Raye around and not have him call plays
maybe have him as an offensive consultant or (like the Colts have) a ‘senior offensive coordinator’. Having a guy like him on the staff is a good thing, even if having him call plays isn’t.
Just checking, have people not heard that the Colts are successful because they’ve had continuity on offense for over a decade? Having Peyton helps, but it’s not the whole story.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 7:40 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn’t mind that
I want me some Buster
by gbears16 on Nov 13, 2009 9:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Or even split up duties
Cardinals haven’t replaced Haley with a single coordinator but have two different coordinators. One for pass and one for running. I wish I knew how they decide which play to run during the game but it’s been working pretty well for them this season.
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I Love That Theory
I’ve been dreaming of this for months now. Raye has alot of knowledge and supposedly has a good eye for talent, and that has kept him around for years, but he’s failed, or at least not performed very well, as an OC. Maybe that’s because he just doesn’t have the knack of calling on gameday. Maybe he can teach and install a great system and just let Johnson have a chance at calling. Couldn’t hurt, could it? It’s not as if we can really go downhill after 200-something yards against the Bears…
by NH49er on Nov 13, 2009 12:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jimmy Raye is not Tom Moore or even close
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
that's not my point
my point is that they hired the guy in order to have some year on year continuity.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 2:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Continuity doesn't really help
If your coaches aren’t any good though.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 14, 2009 12:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Peyton is the de facto OC of the Colts
And has been since his rookie year.
I don’t know if you remember when Peyton was in college, but he basically had a reputation for understand the game intellectually better than just about anyone else. There were articles about how he would find a chance to grab 15 minutes of time from some experienced NFL QB, and the NFL guy would walk away feeling like Peyton was the more knowledgeable of the two.
Peyton’s weakness in his early years was that the game wasn’t played on a chalkboard: he didn’t always react well to unexpected adversity (eg, when he threw his o-line under the bus once for being beaten by some very good defenders). But even then it was the case that you couldn’t really blitz him, because he knew how to pick up that it was coming and always knew exactly where the weak point would be.
I’m sure continuity doesn’t hurt, but the most important continuity for the Colts has been having Peyton at QB.
by Ronaldinho on Nov 13, 2009 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I admire Peyton
He’s got incredible football smarts. I think that if he wans to he’ll make a fantastic offensive coordinator some day (though I bet he goes into the booth or on tv as an analyst).
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 2:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I really hope he does
It seems like he’d be great as a color commentator.
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 14, 2009 12:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Since his rookie year?
That’s giving Peyton a bit too much credit and coaching a bit too little. Even the great rookie Marino needed his OC.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 14, 2009 3:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Marino was an arm
Peyton is a brain.
They are totally different QBs. Peyton’s arm isn’t that spetacular. (It’s fine, but it’s not a canon like Marino or Elway).
What makes Peyton so good, what made him good in college, was his understanding of the game.
by Ronaldinho on Nov 14, 2009 8:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
so you're saying Peyton's arm doesn't take pictures?
I’m confused…;P
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 14, 2009 9:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah really
and I swear Elway had a kodak.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 15, 2009 6:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rothlesberger
has a walmart disposable
by Drew K on Nov 15, 2009 10:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not disagreeing with that
But every rookie needs coaching, even Peyton. Moore set the foundation of that offense, the scheme and game planning from which Peyton learned. At this point Peyton likely only needs someone on the sideline to confirm that he thinks he saw on the field. But he also can’t do everything and still needs an OC to participate with game planning and working with the other ten guys on the field.
It can become too easy to overestimate what Peyton does do and can do.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 14, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They also said many of those same things about Alex Smith
we in the losin baseball binness. and cousin, binness is a boomin.
by walk off bunt on Nov 16, 2009 2:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Young QB & offense searching for consistency and confidence
I thought Vernon should’ve kept quiet but then the offense comes out and is destroying the Bears’ defense. They’re moving with confidence, convert a 3rd down and using nearly 6 minutes of game time. But Crabtree drops a first down inside the 5, Smith gets sacked and Nedney misses a FG. They have yet to show the kind of maturity to turn the game back in their favor when they get a bad break. Much like the four game losing streak, close not but no victory. Until tonight.
Alex played fine; not great, not awful. He didn’t beat himself or lose the game. He had a very accurate opening drive and at one point was 7/9 (both drops by Crabtree). He led a smart final drive that used up over 6 minutes and nearly got us more points. His INT was an unfortunate slip by Crabs and impatient decision by Alex, as the Bears had a deep zone and Gore was wide open underneath. It’s all part of his learning curve that comes with actual playing time. For a guy making start number 3 in two years, I’ll take it. Now he can keep learning from film review and develop chemistry with his WRs in practice. And he ended his personal losing streak.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 1:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Not
Yet
When the season is officially a write off, I think it will be time for Nate to get some reps, but not until the season is lost. The team is 4-5, and has a chance at going 6-1 the rest of the way. Of course, it’s going to take a lot of improvement on the offensive side of the ball, and we don’t get to play Cutler seven more times.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 7:41 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying he is or isn't
I’m just saying if the season is at a loss, it doesn’t hurt the team by putting him in to see what he can do. At this point, we still have a “shot” at salvaging the season, so Nate Davis needs to remain carrying a clipboard, unlike what Kezarvet suggested in the post above mine.
I don’t know if Nate Davis is the answer, because I didn’t asked any questions.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Besides Nate Davis hasn't run the offense since pre-season
He’s been demoted to the point where he’s playing the opposing DB for us during practice.
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thats funny
did you read that somewhere? If so, you should post the link, I’d like to read that.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure if it's demotion IF this is true
You only need 1 QB to run the scout team vs 1st team. So with Davis’ ability, and our lack of DBs, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was helping out with the Scout Team Defense.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 12:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not a demotion
but I still think it’s funny. I also think it’s telling of his value… there’s alot of other guys that could be helping out with the Scout Defense team other than a QB. QB is thee single most protected position in football
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Couple different places
I’ve got both Matt Maiocco and Matt Barrows on my twitter feed. I forget which one it was that said he was playing DB for the scout team. I know that Maiocco said he hadn’t taken any snaps with the offense since pre season.
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 1:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Davis needs to stay where he is.
We don’t need to be evaluating Davis right now. We need to be evaluating Smith for the rest of the season. Let’s give Smith the rest of the season so we can make a decision on him once and for all. I’m sick of giving him and excuse. If we start Davis, then we only have 5 starts to judge Smith, vs 10 starts. Davis has time. To me the urgency is Smith. If I ran the team, I would draft another QB, let Smith and him duke it out for starter. Hopefully my 1st round pick wins, and have Smith as #2, and Davis #3. Davis is a project, and needs time.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 12:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why did Cutloler throw 5 picks? Because the game was on a Thursday.
I’m pretty convinced that the reason why the coaching staff went so conservative was precisely because they were scared to death that if they put the ball in the air more than they did, the Bears would’ve had about as many picks as the 49ers had. They had 1 day to actually practice. They weren’t going to be as sharp, nor were they going to have as deep a well to draw pass-wacky plays from. So their thinking was ‘play conservative, take care of the ball, and you’re going to be OK and come out with a win.’ And they did. Of course I’d be screaming for Raye’s head (again) if I had a) either watched the game or b) the team had lost. But why look a gift horse in the mouth?
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 7:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
The field was also in bad shape. I think they might have taken a couple more risks if so many people weren’t falling down in the middle of their routes.
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 13, 2009 8:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I kept hearing it's the opposite
That usually Thursday games are high scoring because the defense doesn’t have time to scheme for the offense. The offense already knows the plays they are running, so they should be sharp. Anyone have the breakdown of scores for Thursday night games?
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 9:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I won't look him in the mouth
It’s his legs I’m concerned about.
by silverjay on Nov 13, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cutler threw 5 picks
because we had a great pass rush this game. Cutler was being hurried all day long. Every single one of those picks came when he had pressure in his face. We also had at least one ball batted down and there was another one where one of our guys got a finger on it and it sailed incomplete.
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
let's focus on the o line
we need an o line revamp. Alex is just getting comfortable. The o line needs to give him the time.
by zonedogs on Nov 13, 2009 9:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
missing 2 starting tackles does make a difference, no?
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 9:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sims didn't play that bad
but Snyder sucks. It’s official, he sucks. The Tony Pashos injury hurts big time.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 9:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've been saying this for 2 years.
I like Snyder as a backup, but he’s not a true starter—neither at Tackle (too slow) nor at Guard (too weak in close quarters). In fact, I’d rather have Wragge out there at Guard most of the time.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 9:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Problem
is with our injury riddled OL Snyder sees too much time as a starter. I understand going into the season with him as the back up, but the real problem is that he ALWAYS ends up the starter. He should be like an emergency backup. Although with our injuries to OL, he would have started anyways. LOL.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 10:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
+1 about Pashos
And who knew? He is a better run blocker than Snyder and would have been no worse at pass blocking. It’s too bad that right when he had learned the system and earned a start he gets injured.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 10:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
worst case scenario
we get to re-sign at a bargain price, I hope.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 10:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Should anyone blame Hill for his injury?
It was his near INT when Pashos was trying to tackle the LB and helped knock the ball out when he got hurt.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 13, 2009 10:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Simms has been a pleasant surprise
He’s done a fantastic job filling in for Staley. Baas is a decent LG as well, and Heitman is a stellar center. Most of our pressure comes from the right side.
I wouldn’t be opposed to keeping Simms as starting LT and moving Staley to RT (or vice versa if Simms can handle RT duties). I definitely think Simms has earned a shot at a starting position.
by smileyman on Nov 13, 2009 11:08 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Sims does deserve props for stepping in.
I was scared to death when I say Staley go out, but Sims has done remarkably well (knocking wood furiously).
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 13, 2009 11:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think so too
I am not sure why everyone is ripping the O-line. I think since Alex has replaced Hill that they have played considerable decent. Even the best lines in the NFL occasional let sacks happen or miss a block here or there.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 12:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the left side of the line is not the problem
it’s the right side of the line, it seems to have broken off the continent and drifted across the ocean. it’s terrible.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm...weird
I have thought they looked so-so since the change at QB. I take a look at other horrible offensive lines and I think ours has made improvements the last few games
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the offensive line has looked better since the quarterback was changed, that’s probably because the new quarterback is making them look better and not because they actually are better.
Just my opinion, though.
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 13, 2009 1:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I happen to think the opposite
They’re playing better because the better QB is giving them more confidence in that they don’t have to hold their blocks for 5-6 seconds before a ball gets out. Confidence is a key ingredient and they had zero with Shuan in there.
by Drew K on Nov 13, 2009 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agree to disagree this time?
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 13, 2009 1:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It's the Right Tackle
Chilo has had two decent games.
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 14, 2009 5:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Cheers & Boos.
CHEERS:
- Aubrayo Franklin getting his first INT preventing a TD!
- The entire defensive secondary for a great game.
- Justin Smith & Manny Lawson for hurrying and pressuring Cutler all night long.
- Barry Sims, much maligned but played well, keeping Smith mostly clean.
- Frank Gore for making the most out of nothing while getting zero help.
- Greg Manusky for a good defensive game plan.
- Jimmy Raye for limiting Smith’s INT & fumble opportunities.
BOOS:
- The OL for erratic and ineffective rush & pass blocking(mostly Baas, Snyder, and Rachal).
- Alex Smith for the INT toss to Crabtree, his sack(held ball too long), and several panic throws.
- Vernon Davis for his mouth and false start penalties.
- The entire offense for another miserable performance. It was embarrassing.
Btw, for those who couldn’t watch the game, the INT pass from Smith intended for Crabtree was almost all Smith’s fault and here’s why: Crabtree was running the left sideline with the defender playing “outside man”, which means he was taking away the sideline while depending on the cover-2 safety to help on the inside. As the wide-angle replay showed, the safety was late breaking on the play, which left Crabtree open inside. All Smith had to do was read the coverage and throw the ball inside. Anywhere inside, because the safety was far away. Instead, Smith throws it outside and high, to the sideline, where the defender was. Crabs made a heroic effort to get turned around(he was facing inside, expecting the ball) but stumbled slightly. INT. I can’t guess whether Smith just misread the coverage(I don’t see how) or simply was inaccurate in his throw, but this was on him. Either a bad read or a bad throw, take your pick.
by MontanaPass on Nov 13, 2009 12:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The secondary did not play a great game. They got shredded up and down the field all day, were HANDED four interceptions by Cutler, and benefited from a tip at the line to pick off the other one.
Jimmy Raye should not be given credit for “limiting Smith’s fumble and INT opportunities.” To me, that’s crazy talk. If he WAS doing this, it’s probably most of the reason we failed to score more than 10 points off of five turnovers, and he should be eaten alive by fans for it. If he WASN’T doing this, and I believe that he probably was just calling his normal game, then we actually need to give BOOS to the offense for the poor execution and stupid penalties that kept putting us in 3 and out situations and encouraged Raye to stick to a more conservative gameplan.
How can you blame Alex Smith for only taking any sacks yesterday when he managed to limit a disastrous situation to only two sacks yesterday? He should have by rights been sacked five or more times. For shame. For absolute shame. And if you ARE going to BOO him for doing something wrong on one sack, then you should CHEER him for doing so well on so many other plays that should have resulted in sacks.
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 13, 2009 12:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I only listened to the game on the radio
but the execution seemed horrible. On both sides of the ball.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 13, 2009 1:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It was.
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 13, 2009 1:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
the defense only allowed two big drives
an 80-yard drive that resulted in a red zone pick at the end of the game, and an 87-yard drive that resulted in a red zone pick in the first quarter (I think Franklin’s INT came in the first Q).
the only drive of 50 or more yards was the 53-yard drive before half time ended. the secondary had it’s ups and downs, but was pretty decent aside from those three drives (only one ended up with points on the board).
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 1:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
and how many screen 20+ yard screen passes to Matt Forte?
And the 49ers didn’t even have a 50 yard drive. I will say that they did force a reasonable number of punts.
But they didn’t really put in a 6-point defensive performance, other than 5 picks. I suppose they get SOME credit for catching Cutlolers mis-cues. Not sure how much though.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And the 49ers didn’t even have a 50 yard drive.
Which says a lot for how well the defense responded to the lack of offensive production. I’m not saying the D was fantastic, but it certainly was the bright spot of the game. The team has been allowing RBs to catch a lot of passes and Forte definitely exposed the team’s weakness. Any time you let a RB go over 100 yards receiving it stings, especially on a few plays where Forte broke a would be tackler that resulted in the screen picking up chunks instead of just 5 or 6 yards.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 16, 2009 7:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't say shredded
Just two drives, the latter of which was actually stopped with four straight incompletions if not for the weak penalty on Bly. The D didn’t allow a first down on the first two game possessions. And when you get 5 picks, the Qb is certainly somewhat to blame but I think the secondary has to be given credit. There are a ton of horrid QBs out there and they don’t throw 5 INTs.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 14, 2009 3:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, Raye was limiting Smith's opportunities for turnovers.
That’s what the conservative game plan/play calling was all about. After Smith’s INT-filled game last week, Raye devised a game plan that minimized the opportunities for turnovers. And after Smith’s early INT to Crabtree, he got even more conservative with even fewer passing attempts. Instead, he attempted to open up the run by using 3-WR sets and running from the shotgun. It didn’t work out that well in scoring terms but it did minimize turnover opportunities.
Smith’s first sack was on him for failing to get rid of the ball. It wasn’t a coverage sack, he just panicked and went down. And the two quick shovels to Gore and Robinson were also the result of him not finding receivers as the pocket collapsed. He had the time, but just wasn’t seeing the receivers and had to resort to desperation plays.
And the secondary did play well – they stayed at home, played their assignments, and capitalized on Cutler’s mistakes. Other than Spencer’s poor tackling in the first half, they all played a decent game given the guys they had to defend – speedsters D. Hester and J. Knox are hard to contain.
by MontanaPass on Nov 14, 2009 1:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong about Rachal he has had two good games, it's hard to see that because Snyder is doing so horrible.
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 14, 2009 5:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Remember
in the off season when a bunch of people wanted Jay Cutler on the 49ers? Well fanboys? anyone?
by save10 on Nov 13, 2009 12:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ya, still want him
He’s a nice problem to have.
by bignerd on Nov 13, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed.
Bears are letting him air it out, and without the supporting cast he is struggling. Surround him like the Broncos did, and he is a ProBowl QB. I’d love to have Cutler. Maybe we can get him at end of year for 1st rounder. LOL. Let’s hope Bears fire Lovie Smith, and new Coach wants to move Cutler but since he had such a bad season, we get him for next to nothing. LOL.
by hudd07 on Nov 13, 2009 12:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Jay Cutler is the football equivalent of Commodus from Gladiator.
by save10 on Nov 13, 2009 2:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wouldn’t he be the QB of the Steelers than instead of the Bears?
by bignerd on Nov 13, 2009 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Aren't his stats the same as in Denver?
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
by SpurredOn on Nov 14, 2009 3:34 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
really?
I find it hard for me to see Cutler as a nice problem to have, especially after seeing that interception he threw in the end zone. Three defenders right in front of the receiver, and he still throws it there. What’s worst was that he didn’t even make an effort to throw it high.
But I suppose his talents are good enough to where Cutler fans can excuse such a play… until he throws another pick that is.
by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Nov 14, 2009 12:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Without an O-Line any QB can look bad
"Optimist Prime"
"Child Please" -Ochocinco
by rlott#42 on Nov 14, 2009 5:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, which one of you jackbooted thugs deleted my alt's "re alex and the bears-he looked like a deer in headlighs with his shoes tied together. he can't do a qb sneek" FanPost?
It had potential.
by Grant on Nov 13, 2009 1:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
it was Natto.
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 13, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh wait… I mean…
It was wjackalope.
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 13, 2009 1:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
it was me
I emailed him to ask him to post it in here. As amazing as that FanPost title was…
by Fooch on Nov 13, 2009 1:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Wait… was this a real thing?
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 13, 2009 1:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes.
Now I almost wish I’d opened it.
GROUGTHINK ALERT
The first Chester Arthur fanboy ever.
by groug on Nov 13, 2009 1:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The weird thing is that I live in an area with a large deer population. They frequently saunter about the residential streets, grubbing on gardens when they get the chance. Frequently, I drive by them at night with my headlights on. And I can tell you from experience that when a deer is confronted with headlights, it get’s the hell out of the way.
I’ve seen it. Probably a few hundred times in the last five years. Not once has a single deer stood there and looked at my car. Not even the babbys.
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 13, 2009 1:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rabbits stare into the headlights . . . they even run towards them.
by bignerd on Nov 13, 2009 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And they'll stay in the headlights, too.
They panic and take off running ahead of the car/truck, and then refuse to jump out of the headlight beam and keep running for their lives. I once let a rabbit run ahead of my truck for about two miles(I drove slow) before he got tired enough to jump off the road into the dark.
But that’s nothing compared to the grizzly bear that invaded the alley behind our house one day. It was a cub who had become separated from it’s mother – everyone was worried the mother would reappear in a bad mood. It finally wandered off down the hill towards City Hall where it was trapped and removed. Made the television news, too.
by MontanaPass on Nov 14, 2009 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, that reminds me...
of the 1st play against the Texans where Hill pump-faked Mario Williams to get some space to throw the ball away…and then ran into Mario Williams’ arms. Awesome—now I can imagine Shaun Hill in a bunny suit!
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
by grantmp on Nov 16, 2009 6:33 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve seen the deer caught in headlights before, but like you said, they certainly know to get the eff out of the way. One time I was driving a deer was standing on the road. He looked “caught” in the headlights for about an eighth of a second.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 13, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
WRONG
THE WEIRD THING IS A DEER WEARING SHOELACES
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 13, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I nailed a deer a few years back
On El Camino in Belmont of all places.
The problem was that I did see him in the last moment, but I was so thrown by its resemblance to Alex Smith in the pocket that I froze up and hit it square.
by Stoned Slacker on Nov 13, 2009 9:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Very funny
The future ain't what it used to be.
by riderless on Nov 14, 2009 8:10 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
gives new meaning to the phrase
“I’d hit that”
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
do I even have that power?
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
by wjackalope on Nov 13, 2009 1:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would think so. Maybe I’m wrong, though.
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 13, 2009 2:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You posted under a different user name too. I hate that . . . hate it!
by bignerd on Nov 13, 2009 1:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
My instinct and fanboyism told me to bench Cutler on my FF team
and boy am I glad I did. He gave me good numbers last Sunday but I just didn’t feel he could repeat that with short rest and playing SF on the road.
Overall, I found the game to be a bit mundane but I guess I just love offense a lot more than defense and also the strangeness of watching a non-college football game on a Thursday.
Smith was the anti-Cutler last night and I guess you can win like that in the NFL.
Win the inning.
by Scooter Ellis on Nov 13, 2009 4:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
You can win like that only so long as you are playing against the non-anti-Cutler.
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 13, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Game managing?
Smith was the anti-Cutler last night and I guess you can win like that in the NFL.
Shaun Hill showed he could do that all season.
by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Nov 14, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Alex Smith's performance is irrelevant
as long as hiss opposing QB throws 5 more INTs than him.
by mayfieldcol on Nov 13, 2009 5:39 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Don't exaggerate
The differential was only 4.
by silverjay on Nov 14, 2009 11:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
If the oline is so improved, what happened on 4th and 1?
was it the Bears overpowering defense??
by zacksf on Nov 13, 2009 8:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Who said the O-line was so improved?
by Brendan Scolari on Nov 14, 2009 1:00 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
somebody up there did. my point was:
it is still a glaring weakness which effects gameplan, execution and everything else…
by zacksf on Nov 14, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
didn't Smith just slip and fall
“Quarterback Flop” on 3.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
time to start doing some more reading on ...
Colt McCoy
Sam Bradford
Tim Tebow
Jimmy Clausen
Tony Pike
Jake Locker
Jevan Snead
etc. etc. etc.
"We’ll see them again in the playoffs." - Mike Singletary, right after the Week 3 Minnesota game
by Persiflage on Nov 14, 2009 10:30 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
I'm Rec'in this too
and I agree with hudd07. Point made simple indeed.
Although I’m curious as to how the 49ers will handle Nate Davis. I don’t think the team signed him to a 4 year deal for nothin’.
by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Nov 14, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
agreed. He (ND) has an intriguing profile and possible strong upside potential.
If they are smart they will go slow with him and NOT draft a QB next year.
by zacksf on Nov 14, 2009 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
doesn't he do the voice
for Shaggy on Scooby Doo?
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
but you say it so matter of factly. the “case keenum” statement, and nothing else following that, sure makes it sound as though this kid is going to, somehow, come in and save the 49ers (assuming the team gets to draft him).
he’s an intriguing prospect, I suppose, and you may be right, but we don’t know yet. At this point, especially given what we’ve seen from the 49ers, I’d much rather see, “o-line”, instead of “case keenum”. :)
Thanks for the response.
by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Nov 18, 2009 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Tony Pike
Weaknesses:
Lacks some bulk in his body frame
Extremely weak arm strength
Lacks agility and athleticism; can’t evade a pass rush
Somewhat of a statue in the pocket
Floats deep ball a little too much
Not a very good passer on the run
Throws difficult routes – but with unimpressive velocity/talent
Highly limited skill set
Competitiveness hasn’t been tested yet
Older than the average prospect (will be a 24-year-old rookie)
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 15, 2009 6:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
That’s not very nice to cut and paste Shaun Hill’s scouting report and switch it with Tony Pike’s name.
by bignerd on Nov 15, 2009 10:35 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
on the plus side
will be replaced by Kirk after the pilot.
FIRE BRIAN SABEAN... UNLESS HE KEEPS DRAFTING WELL. .. AND SIGNS UNDERRATED PLAYERS LIKE AFFELDT OR PHELPS. .. OR ALRIGHT WHO'S PLAYING WITH THE ALIEN MIND-SWITCHING RAY?
-------
PARPG- Indy post-apocalyptic roleplaying game currently in early planning stages.
by zenbitz on Nov 15, 2009 10:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nicely turned.
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 16, 2009 8:14 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Jevan Snead
I was high on him prior the season, and I still like him if he goes eligible. However, his poor season may lead to him stick around for one more year and get his stock driven back up a bit. He’s likely a second rounder, and I’d have no complaints if the 49ers took him there.
Snead has solid arm strength, and a pretty good athleticism. He just sucks this year, but to be quite honest, I think QB coach Mike Johnson would be able to get this guy squared away in a season or two. We have to face the reality that if the team goes QBOTF in the draft, one of our in-house guys is the starter in 2010, because I doubt anyone is going to throw a rookie into a fire. Not after Smith got Nolaned.
I’d hate if the team drafted Clausen, because I think he’s going to be a turd of a NFL caliber QB. Maybe that’s just my personal feelings getting involved emotionally, but I don’t like him.
by Andrew Davidson on Nov 15, 2009 6:25 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 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.
