There's something about Nate Davis...
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 7:15 AM PST
in News
265 comments
Ok maybe that's a cheesy headline, but it's actually kind of true. Whether you're for or against 49ers QB Nate Davis (as opposed to those of us in the middle), the young man has inspired an inordinate amount of debate. I suppose this isn't surprising given the struggles of 49ers quarterbacks since the departure of Jeff Garcia.
Whatever the situation, it's not surprising some folks have latched on to Nate Davis as the guy of the future. They might not be calling him the next Montana, but they want him out there ASAP. Other folks have made it clear they think Nate Davis is nothing, is not going to make an impact in the future, and has no place on the 49ers roster going forward. Both sides have been quite vocal in their support or lack of support for Davis.
I bring all this up because of my own position, and my curiosity about the extreme folks thoughts on certain issues. When it comes to Nate Davis I am definitely excited by his potential, but I'm also not ready to bet the farm that he's the long term answer. I think the potential exists for him to be a long term answer, but I don't think the team needs to put him out there at this point in time.
What I want to do with this post is offer the various counter-arguments I see to the two extreme positions. I believe that it's way too early to make any sort of hard judgments about Nate Davis one way or the other. I can say with virtual certainty that plenty of folks will disagree on both sides of the debate, so please feel free to fire away with your opinions. And given how some of these debates have developed in the past, let's try and keep things respectful.
After the jump, I consider the two sides of the coin. There's no poll because I don't see this as a black and white issue even with numerous poll options. So whether you agree or disagree, let us know your thoughts in the comments...
Argument 1: Nate Davis should be starting now
I'd first like to clarify this argument. There are certain folks who want to see Nate Davis out on the field later in the season after the team is completely out of playoff contention. I am not talking about this argument. I think a little mop-up time is certainly not completely unreasonable. The argument I take issue with is the argument for getting Davis out there starting now, or as soon as possible.
The easy counter that seems to come up frequently is to point to Alex Smith's rookie season in 2005. Smith was in over his head and was just annihilated out there. Why do that again with Nate Davis as a rookie? Well, this is not actually the argument I would make, at least in its entirety. The 2009 San Francisco 49ers are much different from the 2005 49ers. This team is struggling, but this team also has a lot more talent on it and clearly Nate Davis would be surrounded with an immensely improved group of skill players.
The one area one might compare would be the struggles of the offensive line. And that's where my point is in countering this argument. As much as people complain about Alex Smith and Jimmy Raye, this offensive line is rather abysmal. They'll make a nice play once in a while, but more often than not it seems like Alex Smith has to run for his life. Actually, it's not even running for his life, because many times he has no time to run. Nate Davis certainly has a cannon for an arm and can get the ball deep to Crabtree, Davis and Morgan. However, when a quarterback has 1 second before the pass rush is on him, how exactly are the wide receivers supposed to run their vertical routes? If somebody can answer me that question, maybe you should send the 49ers a postcard.
Argument 2: Nate Davis is useless and has no place in the long term plans of this team
This is more of a summary of that side of the debate, than anything word-for-word. So feel free to correct me if you think I'm misconstruing the argument(s). The way I read it, some folks contend Davis is never going to be a good quarterback and the team needs to consider alternative options.
My problem with this side of the debate is the fact that Nate Davis has been in the NFL for less than one season. I realize his only game action came in the preseason, which is one reason I'm not prepared to name him the savior. At the same time, I don't see why the anti-Davis crowd can't admit that he showed some talent in the preseason (even if it was against backups). It is only preseason, but showing some skills in preseason has to be better than performing poorly in the preseason, right? Or am I wrong on that? Please feel free to rebut this presumption.
I know some folks are concerned about the learning disability, but that's another thing that I think is being overblown. Nate Davis has dyslexia, which basically involves an individual's ability to read, write and spell. It interferes with an individual's "acquisition and processing of language." The team brought Davis in before the draft and had him work with QB coach Mike Johnson. Obviously learning the playbook might be an issue, but I'm guessing the coaches figured that was something that could be overcome. Seeing as he learned the Ball State playbook, I'll agree with them on that. As far as in-game action, the only issue I could see would be in the hurry-up offense when Davis might be reading the play-chart on his forearm. However, I'd like to think the team has figured out a way to overcome that. I could be wrong, but that seems like a fairly basic issue to resolve.
Handling Nate Davis
As I said at the top, I fall somewhere in the middle of the pack when it comes to Nate Davis. I definitely see some skills that could project into the quarterback of the future. However, I also realize 1) it's only based on preseason performance, and 2) putting him in right now behind such an abysmal offensive line is not the smart move. If the team is in fact going to push him as the #1 guy next year (I'm not expecting it initially), why not get a couple big hogs on the offensive line to keep him upright? Build up that offensive line and suddenly those weapons could be absolutely fierce. Davis and Crabtree have looked good this year. Imagine how they would look with more time to develop their routes?
So how would I handle Nate Davis, long term? I'd go with some variation on the Carson Palmer/Steve McNair philosophy. Palmer was drafted in 2003 and sat out the entire year behind Jon Kitna. He never touched the field in a regular season game and then was named the starter at the beginning of the 2004 season. Steve McNair was drafted in 1995. He saw action in 4 games, starting 2 his rookie season. His second year he appeared in 9 games, starting 4. Both seasons the #1 QB was Chris Chandler, who finally gave way to McNair completely in 1997.
So, I'd say if Davis is going to see any playing time, it should be late in the game against the likes of Detroit and St. Louis, if even then. It's a bit more difficult in this situation because you don't have the aging veterans that know they're being worked out the door. You have a young guy in Alex Smith, and a still relatively young guy in Shaun Hill, who won't be quite so accommodating (even if they act nice about it). Hill's only chance as a starter going forward is if the team cuts loose Smith and wants a bridge to the QB of the future, be it Nate Davis or anybody else. But clearly Hill's not a long term answer (or even really a short term one). But the general idea, whomever you're rolling out there, is that Nate Davis could conceivably become your starting QB either midway through 2010, or at the start of 2011. I know that's too long a wait for some folks, but I think if you build up your offensive line this year it's worth the wait.
One interesting little fact about McNair, the year before McNair was drafted, Jeff Fisher took over as head coach with six games left in the season, and had the interim tag removed for the next year. Last year Mike Singletary was interim head coach for 9 games, before having the tag removed. And he also has a rookie QB. It's a bit of a stretch, but it's fun to consider those random possibilities.
Of course, if the offensive line is really the problem, and it's enough to make Alex Smith a better QB next year, that throws a monkey wrench into the plans I suppose.
0 recs |
265 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
There should be no argument
Nate Davis is not seeing the field this year. He is simply not in any way ready and it would be ridiculous to try it. On top of that, we are still evaluating Alex Smith – this might be his first chance to play with some consistency with a team that has actual talent. He needs time to get comfortable and for the coaches to find out what type of offense they can be successful running. Throwing Davis in now would be admitting defeat.
Davis MIGHT be ready to get some playing time next year – after going through all the offseason stuff and training camp and preseason – if he’s still looking like he can play then maybe you go into the season with him as the #2. If Smith has improved and is playing well then too bad for Nate. If Smith continues to struggle then you find ways to work Davis in and get him a little experience. Eventually if you give up on Smith you hand the starting job to Davis. But not until mid-season 2010 at the earliest.
Maiocco hits the nail on the head:
“Davis would have no chance to succeed if he got into a game this season. His goal for 2009 was to learn the offense. We’ll see what he’s able to do once the calendar changes and the 49ers begin their offseason program. Remember, Davis was running a watered-down version of the 49ers’ offense during the exhibition season with and against a lot of players who are no longer employed by NFL teams.”
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 23, 2009 7:33 AM PST reply actions 1 recs
please no Nate Davis (in 2009)
I see no scenario in which it makes sense to play him. Let Smith take the hits this year.
Jason Hill is turning the corner!
Thanks to you saying this, I can spend my time in this thread cracking one-liners. Anytime anybody asks me to be serious, I’ll just link to this comment and be like, “’nuff said.”
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:05 AM PST up reply actions
Not much of a flaw.
Either way, it’s basically just a half-step above college ball when you’re talking about playing wit and/or against that level of talent.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:50 AM PST up reply actions
I forgot to mention
he wears gloves. Only pansies like Kurt Warner wear gloves
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
Play Smith until we are eliminated...
…then give Davis a chance in the last couple of games. I think we have to at least see how Davis performs in game situations before we decide what to do for next season.
This is what I have been saying. I also think that the Jimmy Raye needs to finally realize the strengths and weaknesses of Smith. It seems like when the 49ers get down by a bunch of points, he lets Smith open up the offense a little more, and then POOF! he starts connecting on throws.
Come on West Coast Spread Offense
49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha
by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 23, 2009 9:52 AM PST up reply actions
And how is Davis supposed to play
When he doesn’t know the playbook? He’s been running the scout team, and I think I read mostly as a DB.
SNTS
Shiny
New
Toy
Syndrome
Seriously. With all the complaining about the LMAOline, how is it fair to expect Davis to do anything more than Smith this year?
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
I like that you've upgraded your name for the five guys who stand around at the front on offensive snaps
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
It just flows so much better than LOLine
But in my defense, I did say I was stealing that when I saw you use it :-)
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Oh, I didn't use it
I thought it was all yours!
I was just admiring the way you’d changed it to reflect the increased amount of highlarity generated by yesterday’s performance
I suspect that you think tilting at windmills means something other than what it does
As long as we are mathematically in the playoff race leave Davis on the bench.
If we become mathematically out I would much rather to see if we need to draft high or low for another QB.
"Optimist Prime"
I'll say it over and over Crabtree was not the pick we NEEDED, at least until he scores with 100yds receiving.
Pass Rush
If any one here ever watched Nate Davis play in college, you’d know he’s not your typical QB; at least not the typical QB for the 49ers recently. Nearly every offensive play Ball State ran, had Nate moving to a different spot in the pocket. Now, why is this important? Because then the defesive ends can’t just “t-off” on the straightback, 5 or 7 step dropback QB. Giving Nate more than the 1 or 2 seconds to make a decision. Not only that, but Nate is very good at throwing on the run. I feel his greatest strength is that he IS a Playmaker. Smith and Hill are game managers playing the position of QB. Davis is a playmaker owning the QB position.
Yes, which is why he got snatched up in the 5th round!
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
5th round
Where did Brady and Big Ben get drafted? Everyone knows Davis dropped because of the dyslexia business. Not on field talent.
by getchasketch on Nov 23, 2009 9:07 AM PST up reply actions
Um, Big Ben got drafted in the 1st round?
and Tom Brady is one of the largest outliers in the history of the NFL draft.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Yeah, I get really tired of the “TOM BRADY WAS A SIXTH ROUND PICK. TONY ROMO UNDRAFTED! JOE MONTANA FOURTH ROUND” business.
Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Phillip Rivers, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Ben Roethleberger, Brett Favre, Donovan McNabb, Eli Manning, and Jason Campbell would all like to have a word with those people.
I suppose ending on Jason Campbell wasn’t a strong decision on my part, but I didn’t feel like going back in time and figuring out how many Dan Marinos, John Elways, Troy Aikmans, Steve Youngs, etc. there are.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:18 AM PST up reply actions
wasn’t Montana 3rd round?
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Yes. Good call.
Although in my defense, for some reason people still like to talk about him like a later round pick when they bust out the Tom Brady / Kurt Warner defense. Who knows why.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:24 AM PST up reply actions
The niners historically have had some pretty good successes in the 3rd round. Just off the top of my head – Montana, Owens, Gore.
In conclusion, we should trade every pick we have this year for 3rd round picks.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Your logic appears sound.
Do the Panthers have any third round picks we can trade for?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:27 AM PST up reply actions
Romanowski, Guy McIntyre, and John Taylor were Rd3 picks as well.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Oh lord.
Now the Super Bowl defense?
I get the Ryan and Flacco are still developing, but is there anything that either one has done to make it seem like – as second year players – they aren’t fully capable NFL-caliber quarterbacks?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
So if they are still developing
Then why are they on your list.
Ryan is having a horrible year, and the Ravens are no better than the niners.
Ryan is having a horrible year, and the Ravens are no better than the niners.
Both of those statements are simply false.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:56 AM PST up reply actions
On top of which, the state of the Ravens as a team has very little to say about the legitimately GOOD year that Flacco is having.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:56 AM PST up reply actions
Really
Joe Flacco
2008 Baltimore Ravens 14 TD’s 12 INTS Rate 80.3
2009 Baltimore Ravens 12 TD’s 10 INTS Rate 89.1
Matt Ryan
2009 Atlanta Falcons 16 TD 12 INTS Rate 80.0
Those numbers look REAL familiar… hmmm…..
Alex Smith
2009 San Francisco 49ers in 4 games startes
9TD’s 7INTS Rate 81.5
believe it or not
A) More than just TDs and Ints matter (though they both matter a lot), and
B) QB Rating is a terrible stat.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
How terrible is it Here are top 10 QB's sorted by QB rating
1 Brett Favre
2 Drew Brees
3 Peyton Manning
4 Aaron Rodgers
5 Tom Brady
6 Philip Rivers
7 Ben Roethlisberger
8 Matt Schaub HOU
9 Donovan McNabb
10 Kurt Warner
Well, there are legitimate number-based reasons that QB rating is terrible, but I’d like to point you more simply to QB ratings for college QBs.
A rating system should work regardless of level. The fact that even terrible college QBs are rating in the 120+ range is flat out inexcusable.
Outside of that, QB rating is a “secret” formula that is based on completely arbitrary measures. It barely works in a modern context, and it’s basically nonfunctional if you try to apply it across eras.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
Well, for one, Favre is not the best QB in the league this year
Regardless of the BS that ESPN is forcing down your throat with the MVP crap.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
it is an arrangement of arbitrary things
that usually happens to coincide roughly with QB performance. Pointing to Flacco’s pedestrian rating and concluding that he’s a pedestrian QB is missing the point.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
le sigh
ok, the actual components of the rating aren’t arbitrary, but the way they are weighted pretty much is. And while your list roughly coincides with most people’s list of top 10 QBs, the order is completely off. I don’t think there are very many people outside of MIN who would rate Favre above Manning, for example.
It also doesn’t take things like sacks and fumbles into account.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Its Peyton so far but
Favre is in the conversation. 21TDs-3INTS, 69.7%completion, highest QB ranking in the league.
He’s not gonna win it but he is a candidate. To deny that is hatin’ with blinds on.
Bernard, Percy and AP oh my!
Joe Flacco
Has he done something yet? Rivers, Brees have Superbowls??
Matt Ryan!!! LMAO
Brees, Rodgers, Rivers, Schaub, and McNabb also don’t have Super Bowl titles. Sooooo, by your sound reasoning skills, half of that top 10 list is terrible. So apparently QB Rating is a terrible measurement of a quarterback’s skill, since it doesn’t measure how many Super Bowls they’ve won.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
Your numbers on Flacco 2009 are wrong. Only 8 INT.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
He’s also got a 65% completion percentage and he’s throwing for almost 250 yards per game. Pretty much everything Flacco is doing this year is miles ahead of what he did last season, and last season he was being heralded as the new Joe Cool.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:19 AM PST up reply actions
It's really disappointing to me that "Flacco Seagulls" never stuck as a nickname :(
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
E-mail Chris Berman...
If he picks it up, it will stick for the next 20 years because he won’t bother the think of another one.
Will he need to?
I mean, that one is pretty awesome.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
because his name is Joe and he has a laid back personality
Borderline Neanderthal
I would hardly say he’s blowing people away.
He’s in his second year in the league! My god man, what is he supposed to be doing? Throwing eight touchdowns a game?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:23 AM PST up reply actions
so why did you include him
in a list of first round successes, he’s hardly proven himself to be one. The original point.
It was a list of high-round successes, not first-round successes. And I really don’t see what is so unsuccessfull about him. How exactly has his season this year been anything less than very good? He had a good year last year and he’s improved on it this year in almost every way. There’s no good reason to assume regression, and even if he doesn’t develop anymore than he already has, he’s a very fine NFL quarterback. I’ll take Joe Flacco on the 49ers right now. Yes please.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
I would say neither success or failure
he shouldn’t be on any of those lists
sounds like he’s only there because you wanted to run off a few decent high round QB picks
I think this debate has been done before…
Okay, so knock Flacco, Ryan, and Campbell off my list completely.
We might as well throw Rodgers and Palmer on there since I mentioned them in another comment.
That’s still 13 guys off the top of my head.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:35 AM PST up reply actions
and anyways
the larger point stands. When you compare the success rates of early and late round QBs, it’s not even close.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Okay, so getting back to the ORIGINAL original point.
And my original comment was in opposition to the oft-mentioned idea that “Tom Brady was a sixth round pick” is any kind of basis for thinking that Nate Davis will be successful.
I’m not sure if you’re just arguing with the idea that Joe Flacco is successful, or if you’re actually defending the idea that Tom Brady is reason to believe in Nate Davis.
I admitted already that my “off the top of my head” approach wasn’t a particularly sound one. The larger point stands: The Tom Brady defense is terrible.
Do you think that I’m off-base when I say that?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:40 AM PST up reply actions
looking at stats
Both Flacco and Ryan are good not great this year:
Flacco: DVOA 15.3, yards/attempt 7.3
Ryan: DVOA 14.0, yards/attempt 6.6
The great-
Brees 36.5 / 8.6
Brady 41.4 / 7.8
The awful-
Russell -63.7 / 5.2
Notables-
Cambell -5.0 / 7.3
Smith -11.7 / 6.7
Hill -27.3 / 6.1
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
oh and Favre
39.8 / 7.1
I hate him but by golly he’s having a good season
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
and if you want the whole list:
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
So does Drew Brees
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 23, 2009 1:23 PM PST up reply actions
Listen, I threw out 14 successful (or in Campbell’s case, moderately successful) high-round draft picks off the very, very top of my head. I didn’t even think about it. I just typed. And for guys playing right now, I didn’t even include Aaron Rodgers or Carson Palmer.
All anybody can ever do when talking about the other side of the coin without doing some research is to name 3 or 4 guys tops.
I mean, give me a break.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:54 AM PST up reply actions
Okay, so this was kind of a weak comment on my part. Unnecessarily aggressive and dismissive. Not particularly analytical. I do admit that the “off the top of my head” argument is a poor one for a lot of reasons. But it does bring up the basic point that it’s much harder to identify examples that support the idea that the Tom Brady defense is a particularly good one.
So I apologize for how weak-sauce my comment was. I do, however, stand by my larger point.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:03 AM PST up reply actions
yea i would like to have a word with...
Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russel, JASON CAMPBELL, Akili Smith, Cade McNown, Matt Leinart, Tim Couch, David Carr, Jim Druckenmiller shall i go on???
the problem is people have the idea that if your QB wasn’t taken in the 1st round then he isn’t franchise material, which is ridiculous.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
Yeah, but the failure rate for late round picks is even more astonishingly higher.
If he’s not taken pretty highly, he’s not likely to be franchise material. I’m not saying there is no chance. We all know that late round picks CAN and DO succeed. The point is that the fact that some of them do defy the odds is not a reason to expect that one will defy the odds.
I accept the fact that Nate Davis can be very, very good in this league. I even hope for it.
But I’m not going to expect it just because it’s happened a few times before.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:58 AM PST up reply actions
I think that it’s a reason to be optimistic about Nate Davis, but he wasn’t not drafted in the first round for no reason. NFL scouts are very good at what they do, which is why guys who you should be concerned about fall to fifth round when they’ve seen a little more film on him.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 11:14 AM PST up reply actions
Small Sample, but let's roll with it. 1998 and 1999
998:
Round One:
Peyton Manning
Ryan Leaf
Round Two:
Charlie Batch
Round Three:
Charlie Quinn
Brian Griese
Round Six:
John Dutton
Matt Hasselbeck
Round Seven:
Moses Moreno
1999:
Round One:
Tim Couch
Donovan McNabb
Akili Smith
Daunte Culpepper
Cade McNown
Round Two:
Shaun King
Round Three:
Brock Huard
Round Four:
Joe Germaine
Aaron Brooks
Round Five:
Kevin Daft
Round Seven:
Michael Bishop
Chris Griesen
Scott Covington
So yeah, for every Cade McNown, there are five Scott Covingtons. The point stands.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 11:10 AM PST up reply actions
CHRIS GRIESEN NEVER GOT A CHANCE!!!!!!!!!!
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Moses Moreno could have led his team to the promised land if they just would have believed in him!!!
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
total side note and OT
but while making sure that Chris Griesen never actually got a chance, I discovered that everyone’s favorite QB Tim Rattay will be in the UFL championship game on Friday, along with a few other former Niners, including one of my old faves, Tony Parrish.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Steve Young
was picked in the supplemental draft by the Bucs. How did he get in that group?
We'll see them again in the playoffs! What channel is it on?
Oh, I just looked at his PFR page. It said first-round. Like I said, the list was a low-effort one on my part.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
There's plenty more
Terry Bradshaw, Joe Namath.
I made a list in one thread.
It was like 30 or so names long.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 23, 2009 1:17 PM PST up reply actions
consider it if...
i think this putting him in makes sense AFTER they change their philosophy on offense. we all know that we’re going to the spread soon. sing’s been headstrong about smashmouthing but with all the losing he’ll give in and eat his pride to do what’s right for the team. once we make this change and IF it is still not working then we see davis. we all know the oline is going to suck all year so it’s going to be difficult to get a clear picture on what the futures going to look like anyway.
Yeah our line would make montana look bad lol
49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha
by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 23, 2009 8:48 AM PST up reply actions
Aren't we forgetting something...
Who cares who’s out there as long as Jimmy Raye is in the booth? Brian Billick mentioned that the Niners might have to realize that the spread style offense is our future. Yet Raye keeps trying to fit a round peg in a square hole. How does Davis change any of that?
That is also a problem
49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha
by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 23, 2009 8:51 AM PST up reply actions
offense
He’s shown a willingness to change, it’s just usually been too late. Yesterday in the second half, the team ran 29 passing plays, 28 of which came out of the shotgun. The change that is necessary is to come up with some kind of consistency now. That and an offensive line.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 8:56 AM PST up reply actions
i don’t believe it’s a willingness to change so much as going into panic mode and reverting to what’s worked in the past when falling behind early.
by srill waiting on Nov 23, 2009 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
it's called the "desperation offense"
kinda like west-coast, spread, whatever. ours is called desperation.
It's effective
We can put up good points from it. Sing just needs to realize that this is who we are.
the excuse
real or perceived, is that we don’t have enough plays in the playbook for this offense, that everyone knows…to keep defenses guessing.
there are then two schools of thought from there:
1. It’s working with limited plays now, it’ll keep working with limited plays
2. It’s working now because teams don’t prepare 100% for this offense so they aren’t as ready as they would be if we committed to this offense.
somewhere between what the coaches say and what we see on the field, lies reality.
Coaches don't make adjustments at half time
they do it inbetween drives. Green Bay had plenty of time to adjust to what we were doing on offense in the second half. Same with Houston earlier. It’s effective because our receivers can get open and because Smith has the arm and the accuracy to get downfield.
yeah, I think though
that the argument is going to be that if a team game plans for an entire week knowing you only run those few plays…you wont’ execute nearly as well..
I personally think that argument is bunk
You don’t ever hear people saying that we game planned differently for the 1st half defense than the 2nd half defense.
I don’t get why people think it works the other way.
Davis is more of a triangular peg.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:03 AM PST up reply actions
I think more of a Trapezoid
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
Can't blame that on Raye
It’s Sing that wants the smash mouth football. Raye obviously has good plays ready to go for the spread (we scored 21 points off them in the second half at Houston and at Green Bay). Singletary needs to realize that this team is not a smash mouth team and tell Raye to open it up.
Great.
Now I can’t stop thinking about Matt Dillon talking about Nate Davis.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
Great.
Now I can’t stop thinking about Matt Millen giving speed to a dog.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:05 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
LULz
STEVE HOLM! refuses to be the odd man out.
by UnleashTheGore on Nov 23, 2009 9:55 AM PST up reply actions
Five Points
- You say one of the advantages Nate Davis has, is that he has a cannon of an arm. So does Alex Smith who completed a 38 yard TD pass to Michael Crabtree yesterday. Arm strength isn’t one of Alex Smith’s problems, it never has been.
- Alex Smith has been significantly more accurate in his return in 2009 than he was in 2005 or 2006. What needs work is the chemistry between the WR’s and Smith. That can only come from experience of taking snaps together in practice and during games. Putting Nate Davis in does nothing to fix that.
- Nate Davis would be playing behind the exact same offensive line that Alex Smith and Shaun Hill played behind, and struggled behind. Smith took three sacks in the first half of yesterday’s game and WR’s rarely had enough time to finish their routes, much less get open, before Smith was on the ground. By all accounts Smith is a more mobile quarterback than Davis, so this is something else the switch wouldn’t fix.
- I’m also not convinced that Nate Davis has the intelligence to get it done. Every great or good quarterback has had a good head on their shoulders. Ball State played with a limited playbook and their offense would have been destroyed if they had played a halfway decent defense from any of the major conferences. He told an interviewer that Mike Singletary had played six seasons of pro-football and went to the Pro-bowl 10 times. Even on its face that doesn’t make any sense.
- Smith has experience. He’s getting better. He’s played two good games with very conservative gameplans against Indy and Chicago. He played a great second half with a more liberal (or open) playbook against Green Bay and Houston. Against Tennessee, he had problems but it was the first time all season the 49ers had attempted to execute a pass heavy, quick tempo offense and Singletary and Raye seemed to think it would happen without a hitch. Smith had 3 INT with a total of 4 turnovers. Instead of attempting to fix the communication problems that plagued the Tennessee game, they became gun shy.
In short, I don’t understand how putting Nate Davis in would correct for any of Alex Smith’s shortcomings or help alleviate any of the problems the team faces on defense or offense. To pin yesterday’s loss on Alex Smith is completely unfair, 227 YD’s with 3 TD’s and 1 INT (and only one turnover) is a very solid performance for a QB. Our problems yesterday were much more fundamental:
- * The offensive game plan, especially in the first half, was way to conservative.* There weren’t many attempts to go vertical (like in the second half), nor were there attempts to get creative with the running game. You can’t call the exact same plays out of the exact same formation and expect it to magically work. Furthermore, most of those plays were called out of a pro-offense instead of out of the shotgun in a spread or slot formation (mostly second half). Smith does better in the shotgun and why they insist on continuing to try and pass it out of the eye perplexes me.
- Our O-Line makes the Magonit Line look effective. Three sacks in a first half during in which I didn’t see a series of downs where Smith wasn’t constantly under pressure.
- The defense forgot how to tackle. Or rush the passer, or stop the run. We couldn’t get pressure on Green Bay’s offensive line, a line that had allowed 41 in their previous 8 games.
- Atrocious Punt Returns Although Josh Morgan might have himself a new part time job.
“I’m also not convinced that Nate Davis has the intelligence to get it done.”
… The only thing that I think you’re reaching on.
And I think you’re just going on a gut feeling here, and not actually being objective.
I’ve met people with dyslexia.. They’re not stupid.
by AmorVincitOmnia on Nov 23, 2009 9:17 AM PST up reply actions
So have I...
I know they aren’t. My comment wasn’t based around his dyslexia, it was based around the scouting reports people have been quoting around here as well as his inability to offer a logical answer to that question. Granted it’s an incomplete picture but those are the only two pieces of data any has to work with here.
OMG, not that tape
The only illogical aspect of that tape was the person who plastered an incorrect recap of the interview all over this website.
Correct
Davis didn’t know how many seasons Singletary played. (That doesn’t make him stupid.) The second (correct) answer was fed to him by Josh Morgan off camera. I’m sure he knew it was inconsistent with the first answer. Even an athlete has to have some degree of smarts to get into a college.
We'll see them again in the playoffs! What channel is it on?
Our O-Line makes the Magonit Line look effective.
nicely done.
I also think you’re reaching on the intelligence thing. Have you ever heard Kurt Warner talk?
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Have you ever heard Frank Gore speak
He doesn’t sound so smart in interviews either, but you can’t stay he isn’t a great player. The interview thing is a stupid way to measure someone’s intelligence.
intelligence
In that interview he got the initial question wrong about playing seasons, then just started repeating what someone (I think Josh Morgan) was telling him. I think it was meant more for humor than a testament to his intelligence. I don’t think anybody here actually can say how smart he is.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 9:28 AM PST up reply actions
Your right...
I haven’t seen Nate Davis play outside of the pre-season, where I didn’t think he was all that impressive playing against opposing third stringers. My comments were just a reaction to coverage in the Chronicle, the Merc and from Miaocco (etc.), the answer to that question and the scouting report.
Does anyone realize
That when playing against 2nd and 3rd stringers, your also playing WITH then as well???
Watch the Davis Pre-season video and count how many times he was forced out of the pocket in less than 1 second.
He also threw...
several interceptions, lots of incomplete passes, passes that shouldn’t have been thrown, and several sacks. If you strung Smith’s game film over the past 4 games together you could put together a very good looking highlight reel. There’s a real difference between 15 minutes in pre-season and 60 minutes of actual football.
One INT
And it came on a weird play.
It bounced off the defender’s leg and hung up in the air for like 2 seconds (another defender came over and caught it).
I agree with mostly everything you said in your original comment BTW (except the intelligence thing)…..
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 23, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions
Fooch
If we want to open a debate about a general Intelligence factor, lets go.
Intelligence has nothing to do with the success of a QB. Playing sports and quantitative intelligence measures are largely independent.
That's true as well...
If I could go back and edit that post and just delete the intelligence section I would. I think it’s distracted unnecessarily from the point I was trying to make.
If you watch the Pre-season video.
Not only does he make quick decisions, but he gets rid of the ball EXTREMELY fast. You almost can’t even see his arm move.
Would you describe it as...
Neo-like throwing action then? It’s so quick we can only think he moves like the agents?
When he’s ready, he won’t even have to move his arm.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 10:07 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Dammit goatfather not everyone believes what you believe.
by hellaninersfan on Nov 23, 2009 4:02 PM PST up reply actions
intelligence
I’d prefer to not open that can of worms personally. I think there is enough to debate without dsicussing that specifically.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
unfortunately not
I’d have to delete the entire post, which would delete all the replies. I think this subsequent discussion will hopefully get people off the topic of intelligence.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
Not only that
interviewing skills have got nothing to do with intelligence either. Some people interview well, some don’t.
That was only on the 3rd question
the 2nd he did not receive the answer which was lacking intelligence and good judgement. The rest is speculation on your part as well as bignerds
also for you to say they he was in a QB friendly system
then why the hell have they sucked it up since he left ball state??? they have a 5th year senior and another that can’t do anything in that system
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 9:28 AM PST up reply actions
point #1
Nate Davis threw the Ball 70+ yards. Alex does not have a weak arm but he cannot throw 70 +
So can JaMarcus Russell I don’t think he’s doing very well
49ers Al Grito De Guerra!!! hahaha
by 49erSalvatrucha on Nov 23, 2009 9:56 AM PST up reply actions
thank you for the "with" its quite a relief and an important qualification!
He does have quite a bit of tape at Ball state. Its more about just looking at how he plays the position, think Blink; Malcolm Galdwell.
again, quality of competition (and teammates)
Ball State – and the MAC – are not even 3rd string NFL caliber teams.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
MAC
People complain about the MAC, but it’s not like it’s a black hole of talent. Plenty of talent has come from less talented conferences (Jerry Rice, Joe Flacco, Randy Moss since Marshall was 1-AA before joining the MAC).
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions
I understand that, but it's not the point I was making.
I’m talking about the overall talent level, not including the exceptions. In college, the best talent goes to the biggest (read: BCS) conferences, save for a few non BCS schools. There are always exceptions, but the talent is just not the same in the smaller conferences. It sucks, but it’s true.
Basically, the easiest way to demonstrate what i was saying would be this: Take Davis’ Ball State team last year and put them up against a team made up of NFL 3rd stringers at each position. Ball State would get absolutely DESTROYED by that team because their BEST player (Davis) is currently an NFL 3rd stringer.
They call their best player "Kung Fu Panda" and they complain that people aren’t taking them or the game seriously enough? -Nick
Uhhh, so would 99% of all college teams
A team on of NFL 3rd stringers is still a college All Start list.
not really
any top-10 team would at least put up a good fight, the top few teams would probably even win pretty regularly.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
not Tim Tebow
necessarily, but a lot of the players currently playing for Florida, ’Bama and Texas will be much better than NFL 3rd stringers.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
I dunno. ’Bama and Texas have been playing Division II schools out of conference to amass those undefeated records and good stats. Those teams can easily be equal to Ohio St. and USC given their concerted effort to avoid all competition.
Texas and 'Bama
have also been demolishing teams in conference. Though some of the ‘Bama games were close score-wise, if you watched them, their defense is elite. Like, you could put their starting D as a starting NFL D and they probably wouldn’t be the worst in the league. (not that they’d be average or close to it)
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
point #4
Are you Steven Pinker? Have you ever listened to Terry Bradshaw – he doesn’t build rockets.
4 agreements, 1 point
See now this makes complete sense to me. On all but the inteligence of Davis, which is an unknown quantity – my brother has dyslexia, he also has a doctorate in bio-engineering, so I completely agree with the nothing to do with his inteligence part, more the quote, you are basing the inteligence of the guy on one quote? Have you never had those moments when you just don’t seem to say the right thing and you know it but too late someone is laughing at you for it? Try it with a bunch of reports eager for you to do something dumb.
Apart from that, total agreement here with this.
One point do you mean the Maginot Line?? the wall between France and Germany that the French kept building up and the Germany’s kept going around???
I have noticed too many team struggling to get through the offensive line they felt the need to go round the outside. I mean come on don’t these guys train againast Franklin and isn’t he a beast at the moment???
Yeah...
Well, unlike the Germans who just went around the big wall in France, the defensive linemen are penetrating the front never mind the blitzes from the side. But as a defensive instrument (meant to keep Western France safe from the Germans, just like the O-Line is supposed to keep the QB safe from the D-Line) it has been an abysmal failure.
I have to say
i haven’t read this whole comment yet, but one thing:
I don’t think Alex senses a rush for crap. I saw him step INTO sacks a few times yesterday. Mobility matters not when you don’t “mobile” yourself to the right place.
I actually agree with this
he’s great at scrambling but he’ll sometimes step into a rush and he also tends to start scrambling a little early (not that I can blame him with the protection he has).
He did step into a few sacks the other day. I haven’t seen him doing it regularly, but I’ll be keeping my eye out for it going forward.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 12:17 PM PST up reply actions
A couple years ago, people started cheering for Shaun Hill to get playing time over Smith and Dilfer. Before that, I believe Cody Pickett was the 3rd stringer of everyone’s affection. Rattay was once pined for over Garcia. I’m fairly certain people thought Grbac and Bono should have been the starter for the Niners years ago.
Many people want what they don’t see, while others prefer the devil you know. Personally, I think they should stick with what they’re doing, and if there’s a QB the Niners like next year available to them in the draft or free agency, they should draft him. Never mind whether or not the team is high on Davis.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
Davis
I think the argument for Davis is that he has actually shown some of the physical tools that Pickett and Hill have never shown. Again it was only the preseason, but it’s certainly worth flushing out a bit more. Hill won some games, but has never looked like a high skills QB, and Cody Pickett was more just an entertainment thing.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 9:41 AM PST up reply actions
Thank you
Guys, I don’t care who was playing during the preseason games when it comes to these points:
Dropping back, looking at your reads, realizing who is covered and moving through those reads, then finding the appropriate receiver and hitting him with a timely, accurate throw for a completion needed to move the ball. That is a skill.
Throwing the ball into a tight window and completing the pass. That is a skill.
None of these things mean he’s the best QB ever. But they are skills that are independent of who is on the field.
I think Tim Rattay got a raw deal. I mean, you throw a few critical 4th quarter interceptions and suddenly nobody likes you anymore.
That said, he was only ever the QBOF in my wildest fantasies.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:43 AM PST up reply actions
I believe it was the great TO that once said that “Rat” should be throwing him passes instead of Garcia. but then he also said that Garcia looks and smells like a rat… Apparently TO couldn’t tell the two apart. Hmm… But I digress… I don’t remember what my point was. Oh yeah, Owens wanted Rattay throwing him passes, until he actually DID throw him passes. His affection faded quickly after that.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
Nate the man
You never now untill you try, After we are out of the play off race, Let Nate give it a shot, He can’t be as worst as Hill of Smith.
Syntactically and stylistically speaking, that is a thing of beauty.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Nov 23, 2009 9:44 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
literally LOLing
A hearty thank you to Rich Aurilia for all the good memories, and to the Niners for finally getting the uni's (mostly) right.
It would be cool if they gave him a couple snaps
this season so we could see how good he looks in a regular season game.
Yesterday's opponent provides us with the answer we need
Aaron Rodgers spent a full 3 seasons behind Farve in GB, learning the system and how to adjust to the speed of the NFL game, and yesterday dominated in a game in which he played with the same level of RB, arguably the same level of OL (although ours looked a lot worse yesterday), slightly better WR/TEs, and against the same level of Defense that Alex Smith also encountered yesterday. Now I know that 3 seasons is a bit extreme, and I know that he wont have a teacher near the level of Brett Farve, but I think Davis will benefit from only having to learn the playbook and play QB in the scout team this season. After all, if we’re giving Cody Wallace at least two seasons to learn the Center position, wouldnt it make sense to give a QB just as much?
I think that while we still have Smith, we should give him one good “final” chance, in which he comes into next preseason as the starter, has a better o-line, has an offense built around his strengths, and has an entire training camp to build a repoire with his WRs and TEs. If he still fails midway through next season, then we hand the keys to Davis.
by most accounts
Favre wasn’t much of a teacher.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
true
Ive heard those accounts where Farve sounded like a genuine d—k when it came to passing the torch by mentoring Rodgers, but Bill Simmons i believe talked about the “QB success by inertia” theory, which explained Matt Cassel’s success was due to sitting and watching Brady and River’s success was because he sat behind Drew Brees for two yrs. Even if not direct teaching is involved, just watching a guy succeed 16 games a yr and for 2-3 seasons could have an enormous impact.
Now, lets just hope Davis doesnt observe and end up picking up Hill and Smith’s bad tendencies…
by Rep the Bay on Nov 23, 2009 10:22 AM PST up reply actions
McCarthy makes some bonehead calls too
Remember early in the season he refused to stop calling 5 and 7 step drops?
Which led to the 41 sacks.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 23, 2009 1:37 PM PST up reply actions
If Alex cannot put together some complete games
the rest of this season I would be a proponent of opening up the QB competition this off season! And Shaun Hill should not be a part of it!
Thank you Al Davis for Michael Crabtree!!!!!
This Is Where I Stand
Nate Davis shouldn’t see any action this season less in a mop up role.
1. We cannot throw him behind this offensive line to get his confidence blown by sacks and forced passes due to pressure.
2. Alex Smith is still our QB and hasn’t shown anything to be pulled yet. In my opinion it is more the play calling then anything else. When running out of the spread formation this season Alex Smith has completed 31-55 passes for 433 yards, 6td and 2int.
3. Believe it or not we are still only two games out of the playoffs. As much of a longshot as it may be we cannot throw in the towel
4. Nate Davis just isn’t ready. I have heard people say that he needs to be put in because of his “pocket presence” and “what he has shown” .. This is just plain idiotic, he has only played in pre-season games against other teams reserves. Isn’t that a little premature to say the least?
"Cannot play with them. Cannot win with them. Cannot coach with them. Can't do it. I want winners. I want people that want to win!!!"
i have a question.
alot of people had Davis going in the first maybe second round before his disability came out.
what IF he was drafted in the 1st or second round. would we still be having this conversation??? because i think thats the real problem is no one here is comfortable with a 4th-7th round qb taken in the draft being the franchise.
No, it’s more that historically QBs taken in the late rounds are extremely unlikely to be the franchise.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
Davis
Part of the reason he dropped was also a poor finish to the season. I’m not sure (although not positive on this) that it was entirely due to his dyslexia.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
yea i also read an article that they reffered to ball safety and a few bad games
but smitty is still here so i think we are willing to look past things like that…lol
seriously i don’t think anyone is ball security perfect nor will never have a bad game. and why does no one realize that draft scouts are OVERLY critical of the players they scout. 1 bad game and you are off the list because its their jobs on the line and they are not going to place a bet if they don’t think its a sure thing. so you really would have to do research on the draft scout.
hell alot of people said percy harvin wasn’t going to transition to the nfl and i think he is rookie of the year.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
It was 2 consecutive bad games.
And he was BAD.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 23, 2009 1:39 PM PST up reply actions
Do you know for sure.
Whether or not Davis actually has Dyslexia?
I don’t recall ever reading from someone who would know, that Davis had Dyslexia. The only thing I recall reading is that he had a learning disability similar to Dyslexia.
Just asking because I worry too much about unimportant things.
very good article, and you are right its not.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 11:49 AM PST up reply actions
never mind
I’m an idiot. In my own link Davis is said to be denying it’s dyslexia. Confusion all around.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 11:51 AM PST up reply actions
i think people call it dyslexia because there it no real term for it.
He has a learning disability (often referred to as LD) that makes it harder for him to learn by reading information. It’s a problem that has been documented since he was in junior high school.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 11:52 AM PST up reply actions
Bottom Line on Davis...
Is that he should take this year to soak up knowledge from the sideline. Give Smith the rest of the year to see what he can/can’t do. We’re pretty much outta the playoffs for this season so we might as well let Smith Show and Prove…That way we can release him next year if we decide he’s not worth keeping around…
The real question here is...
Will they draft a QB next season, and if they do, why keep Hill on the roster?
Well, we're waiting....
oh if they draft another i'm sure hill is gone
no sense in having 2 or 3 potential starters in their early to mid 20’s and hill
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 11:54 AM PST up reply actions
I'd be surprised if Hill makes the roster next year anyway
I can see us picking up a QB in the late rounds and then letting them all duke it out for the starting position. n and letting them all duke it out for starting position.
I can't see us drafting a QB high
Our other needs are too great. We can get a solid QB in the 3rd round or later.
i'm really starting to think your just trying to get under peoples skin.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
Shaun Hill is a pretty good back-up
I wouldn’t want him off the team.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by chikmagnet_565 on Nov 23, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions
BECAUSE HE'S THE REASON SING WAS HIRED IN THE FIRST PLACE
DUH! DON’T YOU READ FANPOSTS DRUMMER GEEZ!
"Pat is still just scratching the surface." - Coach Singletary on LB Patrick Willis
I am not understanding why this is even a topic. Currently the depth chart is like this.
1. Alex Smith
2. Shaun Hill
3. Nate Davis
How is he going to play if he isn’t even #2 on the depth chart.
To me it makes more sense to give Smith the rest of the year to show what he has. Personally (and along with others), Smith has shown he has the ability to make brilliant throws and plays when he has time to throw it. How is Nate Davis going to fix the half second our QB’s have to throw the ball…
C’mon.
sweet enjoy the mediocrity...
i don’t want to see smith ALMOST get us there.
but apparently your ok with waiting till next year, and the next, and next.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
Smith has done better each game he's played
The Green Bay game was actually his most consistent game I thought. 3 TDs in the air, 1 INT (which was due to a messed up route). He made good decisions, didn’t stare down receivers, etc., etc.
You dont know what youre talking about
Your analysis and perception of Nate Davis here is unwarranted and backed with very little to go off of. So what he completed a couple passes in preseason. He looked God awful in the Oakland game and even worse in the San Diego game. He stares down recievers and he makes a ton of over throws. His preseason stats are less than mediocre for the preseason in which he played against the scrubs of other NFL teams. There is way too much Kool-Aid being consumed by everyone saying that Nate is good. What makes anyone think that he would do better than Smith or even Hill for that matter. There is a reason he is 3rd on the depth chart. Dont you think if he wasa as good as any of you are saying he would at least be 2? Chew on that for a bit and do not reply until you have something credible to come back with.
Wasn’t it you in the other thread that said you don’t need a TV to know that Alex Smith sucks? Weak.
Next…
you must be getting me confused...
but that could be a true statement. i can’t say he looked god awful in either of those games. go back to smiths rookie year then you will see what god awful looks like. i’m sorry having a qb that can only perform under 1 formation doesn’t sound like a very balanced offense to me.
and all the bad things your stating about davis is everything that smith has done as well
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Alot can be done from the shotgun formation
Go back to the Houston Oilers led by Warren Moon or the Bengals in the 88-89 Season led by Boomer Esiason or even the K-Gun offense in Buffalo led by Jim Kelly in the 90’s (I seem to remember them going to 4 Superbowls under that offense?).
Alex Smith is much more mobile than any of those QB’s which makes it even more dangerous.
It sounds like you need to stufy up some more on you r football and analysis of things. Maybe that will help your perception a bit more. Instead of just saying things like, “Nate or bust” for no good reason other than you have some sort of false gut feeling on the guy. Go look at his stats on espn.com if you don’t believe me about his stats being average at best playing against less than average competition. Also, just because a guy has an “arm” does not equal he is mucho talented… The footage on youtube of Davis shows more downside than up.
Also
going back to the K-Gun… Thurman Thomas was utilized very well from that formation and racked up 1000+ yard seasons each year. It would fit like a glove with the offensive players we have now
Just Look At It
Alex Smith looks GREAT in the spread formation and it minimizes our offensive line weakness. I see absolutely no reason why the 49ers shouldn’t run that at least 90 percent of the time. Mike Singletary needs to stop being stubborn in regards to this. Vernon Davis and Michael Crabtree said as much yesterday after the game. And although Alex Smith backed Jimmy Raye i think that was a little more of showing “support” for your coach then anything else.
How much more clear can it be? Run the Spread offense right away against Jacksonville!!! I will be calling for blood if they don’t
"Cannot play with them. Cannot win with them. Cannot coach with them. Can't do it. I want winners. I want people that want to win!!!"
Didn't the Dolphins
break out the wildcat mid-season last year? And didn’t they finish their season in elite fashion?
I agree…go for it. What do you have to lose at this point? Frank Gore can still be effective out of the formation. Possibly even more dangerous since he can catch the ball also (like I mentioned above with Thurman Thomas). Gore has the capacity to be a back like T. Thomas or M. Faulk. Use him that way. Forget about all this power formation/ smash em/ run it down their throats mentality
by Drew K on Nov 23, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Agreed And +1
Gore could even be more affective in this formation as you wouldn’t be seeing 8 in the box and he would have more open field chances. Two of Gore’s best runs against Chicago came in that formation. I just don’t see any reason why the 49ers won’t open up with the spread against Jacksonville. i Am real excited to see Smith, Crabtree and Davis play in that formation over an entire game.
"Cannot play with them. Cannot win with them. Cannot coach with them. Can't do it. I want winners. I want people that want to win!!!"
Last week
Gore had his best gains out of the shotgun.
The spread works. I want us to come out in the spread for the first half and put big points on the board. If we’re ahead by 2 or 3 TDs at the half then we can go back to playing under center.
If we’re ahead by 2 or 3 TD’s we need to keep going after the throat. Dont let up. That is the problem with this team or Raye’s playcalling. If something is working, you have to keep doing it. Forget milking it unless it’s the 4th QTR and you’re up by 21 with 5:00 left or something. Then and only then should you go in to those bogus power formations that rarely work for us.
Nate or bust
I don’t think whitemike1644 said Nate or Bust. Up above he seemed in favor of this comment:
Is that he should take this year to soak up knowledge from the sideline. Give Smith the rest of the year to see what he can/can’t do. We’re pretty much outta the playoffs for this season so we might as well let Smith Show and Prove…That way we can release him next year if we decide he’s not worth keeping around…
That doesn’t seem to be such an extreme position.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
Seems sort of contradictive
to anything else he has been saying in other threads. Even just the ones right above in response to mine
true
Some people aren’t entirely clear in these threads.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions
topic
It’s a topic because there are people who are sufficiently intrigued by Nate Davis, and others who don’t care. I think the fact that he’s #3 on the depth chart as a rookie doesn’t exactly scream that he’s crappy.
And yes he had issues in the preseason. But to say he’s worthless based on 3 preseason games is kind of ludicrous. The issue I have is that people are going to such extremes on both ends of this debate.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
It is equally ludicrous
to say he is the next coming or has a large enough sample size to say he will amount to anything (being that he is 3rd). I mean I am not knocking you for posting it. You obviously put time in to doing it. But me, personally, I think it is premature…again not knocking you.
I am thinking there may have been a better time to post it is all. We aren’t completely out of the playoff hunt just yet. Although it is not promising…but…. there are several factors as to why, not Smith. And Alex has been showing signs of life not mediocrity as people are calling it. He has grown alot….no more happy feet, etc. He looks calm in there when he isn’t running for his life
And
not sure what gives people the perception that he would do any better when he didn’t even do well in preseason against nobody’s with the exception to the Dallas game. I mean he had one good game out of 3 ……In the Preseason. Again, there is reason he is still 3rd on the depth chart. What that is, none of us know, only the coaching staff
Davis
I’m not sure if you’re understanding the point of my post. The whole point is that people have made extreme judgments in such a premature amount of time and I was opening it up to see why people feel the way they do about each side of the debate.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 12:55 PM PST up reply actions
this is my point exactly.
am i going to defend davis yes.
everyone (DREW) thinks the guy should be cut, i mean come on talk about premature judgment.
my argument was and always will be. let smith finish the year. IF we are out of the hunt, once again IF then let Davis play against the lions.
come next year if he is ready to compete for the starting job cool, if not i’m fine with him even sitting another year. i don’t think that will be the case but i’m ok with that also.
i’ll also say i’’m not ok wasting a 1st or 2nd round on a QB that will come in a year behind davis when he has shown nothing to make us think he could not be a starter.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 6:39 PM PST up reply actions
I'm a moderate (on this issue)
The first decision is not about Davis, but about Smith. Is he our guy or not? Some still believe in him. Unless you’ve given up, there is no reason to insert Davis (except if you think he’s a future star).
If you’ve given up on Smith (I don’t get a sense that the coaches have), then it’s a question of timing. Should Davis play this year? Advantage: we’d get a look at him before we have to make offseason decisions. Unfortunately, that look will be colored by inadequate preparation and the same protection problems that have plagued Smith and Hill.
I don’t think Davis can get a fair test this year. Further, I believe that the OL is the team’s biggest weakness. Until that weakness is addressed, evaluating quarterbacks is like test-driving cars without wheels.
So I’d leave the QB situation alone. Focus on fixing the OL. If there is discontent with Smith at the end of the season, give Davis a chance to compete next preseason. I would not spend a high draft pick on another unknown quantity to take snaps. Get blockers.
We'll see them again in the playoffs! What channel is it on?
I think the basic problem with the proposition is...
Most people don’t see where Nate Davis would offer a substantial upgrade to Alex Smith…
- Alex can accurately throw to 40+ yards with a good amount of zip. It’s not perhaps as good as Davis’ 70+ range but right now we can’t keep the QB upright long enough for 30 yard routes much less 70 yard routes.
- Alex is a more mobile QB than Davis is (even at Ball State). With the O-Line problems we have, I’d rather opt the more mobile QB with the Maginot Line (or LMAO-Line) problems the 49ers have.
- Alex Smith has dramatically improved his accuracy from less than 50% in his first two seasons to better than 60%+ (close to 65%)
- You need to build chemistry between your WR’s and QB and OC and HC. We’ve inserted two new WR (Morgan and Crabtree), a new QB and elements of a spread offense. This happens with reps in practice and in games, not overnight. Replacing Alex Smith with Nate Davis would only complicate this especially since we have seen good chemistry between Smith and Davis as well as Smith and Crabtree.
- Smith continues to develop and improve. We’ve gotten two good games with a really conservative playbook (Chicago and Indy), two good halves with a more open playbook (Green Bay and Houston), and only one real problem game (Tennessee) which was the first time San Francisco had attempted to implement this new offense for an entire game.
I don’t see how replacing Smith with Davis fixes the O-Line problems, or the chemistry problems, or the defensive problems or how it helps the 49ers develop either Alex Smith or Nate Davis. If you think Davis is a legitimate prospect, you want him to spend time on the bench learning how to play the pro game. Sending him out behind this O-Line will guarantee he gets smashed.
Fair enough...
It was initially intended just to show there would be little to no benefit to making the move, unlike the Hill – Smith trade, where there was substantial upside evident
throwing power
One thing I did notice in the preseason that I’d like to pull out is related to arm strength. When Alex Smith scrambles to his right and throws the ball I rarely see much zip on it. In the preseason, Nate Davis scrambled to his right, he fired a very nice pass to one of his receivers. Only one pass, but a skill like that impresses me.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions
Interesting
I haven’t noticed Smith loosing velocity on passes when scrambling. I will have to watch for that in the future. When you mention that, the only thing that comes to mind for me is that pass in the Titans game to where he zinged that one to Hill in the back of the endzone on the fly. Maybe there are more instances where he does what you say, but I cannot recall any.
Smith fade
I think I meant more those passes when Smith runs back and to his right away from the line (as opposed to that one linked above where he’s starting to move forward into the throw). Just seemed like Davis had a bit more velocity on the move. Although Smith has more general mobility. Not important at this point. More just one thing I like looking forward.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 2:14 PM PST up reply actions
Hopefully
our QB’s can get away from having to throw any passes off their back foot. None of the QB’s in the league ever have to do that anyway because their Olines offer enough time to throw a regular pass. And 9 times out of 10 you are looking to get that specific pass (velocity or none) picked whether it be Brett Favre, John Elway, Dan Marino, or whoever…it gives DB’s extra time to react
Hopefully in that scenario a QB, a smart one anyway, will just throw that pass away.
The problem's that throws off the back foot usually haven't much power...
because throwing off the back foot places you at a mechanical disadvantage. And even when those throws do have some zip, because the quarterback is a prodigy of arm strength (see Russell, JaBustus), the strange mechanics of such a throw rob it of any possibility of accuracy. That’s an even bigger contributor to such throws getting picked than velocity. When you see a guy complete one off the back foot, he just had a stroke of pure dumb luck. The 49ers are not the only team with trashy O-line play. They are not the only team with a quarterback who may be tempted to try such a throw. It’s on the coaches to teach the necessary technique and instill the discipline not to do it, and you hope that your QBs will absorb the lessons better than the example above.
Don't Get Me Wrong
Nate Davis has mad talent and he would be a reason not to draft a QB high in 2010 as would Alex Smith. I look at it like this, we have two possible franchise QB’s on the roster in Nate Davis and Alex Smith. Don’t attack me for including Smith in this. If given the offense that fits his strengths and the abilities of the skill position players Alex Smith has shown himself to be more then successful regarding that. Keep in mind that he is still only 25 years old and has continued to improve, at least in regards to the spread offense which i believe we should run. I do think that Nate Davis should be given a larger look in the preseason and during mini camps next season. He has all the physical abilities to succeed in the NFL. And i am not at all worried about his learning disabilities, that can be fixed and the game plan can be changed to minimize its affect
"Cannot play with them. Cannot win with them. Cannot coach with them. Can't do it. I want winners. I want people that want to win!!!"
This is a moot point
The 49ers coaching staff has basically said he won’t see the field, that’s he’s not even close to being game-ready (I believe that’s a Jimmy Raye quote).
I think he has potential but he needs to sit this year and quite possibly another after that before he could really make something of himself.
A point to all those clamoring for him: do you really want him thrust into game action too early where his play (in all likelihood – abysmal) might get him misevaluated and we let him escape a la Kory Sheets (I’m really just throwing that comparison out for the pr0-Kory Sheets crowd)?
Sheets/Davis
One difference is that Sheets was on the practice squad and could be signed off the squad by any other time at any point. Nate Davis is signed to a 4-year contract and thus can’t be signed away unless the team actually cut him.
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 2:01 PM PST up reply actions
given our o-line...
I can’t say it’d be a great idea to start Nate Davis, at least not now. But if we’re mathematically out of the playoffs, then I’d say it wouldn’t hurt to see what he could do in the last 2 games of the season…if that.
And speaking of our o-line, how long should it take for us to get the right group of guys blocking up front??? It’s been ages and forever since we had a team that could feasibly contain a pass rush…except for the stint where we had Larry Allen. Can’t believe we let him retire.
Davis needs to get playing time !
The fact is that Nate Davis is the ONLY qb on the roster now that has any chance of becoming the Franchise QB of the future. He has all the tools to become great,now he only needs to prove himself on the NFL field of play. The problem is that we need to know before next years draft and free agency if we need to go after another QB,or if Davis is going to be the guy.
We know(if we are honest with ourselves) that Alex Smith is not the guy .He may be a great backup QB but he just doesn’t have the " IT " factor to become anything special. We know Hill is a winner but his arm strength is not good enough to get him into that special catagory.
Nate Davis has all the tools and intangebles to be special but right now it is only potential,he must show he can put those tools to work in the NFL,as he did in college.But if he doesn’t get playing time THIS season,then how will we know if we need to search for another QB of the future in next years draft or free agency? If Davis is not made ready to start next season,then we will once again have a wasted season in 2010. This season is almost certainly not going to be a playoff year,so why not get Davis as much learning time in games as possible to see exactly what the kid is made of ?
Because what he can most likely learn right now...
Is how to flinch in the face of a pass rush, get happy feet, and/or throw the ball away too soon. As a 3rd team guy, he isn’t getting a whole lot of reps, either. Maybe next year, unless the porous pass protection gets both the guys in front of him hurt. Under that scenario, I wouldn’t expect anything great from him. Maybe a couple of pass plays that look decent from a simplified offense that emphasizes the run even more.
Exactly
that’s what we want from our QB of the future. Plus we want mad CAT-LIKE INSTINCTS!
(Just so we’re clear I’m being sarcastic.)
There are things that I like about Nate Davis. He did look good in the preseason. Nice touch, good arm strength, etc. He’s no way ready to run the offense this year. Yeah he’s on the sidelines holding the clipboard and that’s good—gives him a chance to soak up some learning, but he isn’t even playing QB in practice.
He’s taking snaps as the DB fercryingoutloud.
I would like to see him get lots more playing time next preseason to get a better idea of what he can do. Right now he’s an unknown quantity with some intriguing upside.
Davis IS now getting some reps in practice at QB. That may be because they know they need to start getting him ready as soon as possible,since alex is not showing any significant improvement over what he has shown before(some improvement ,yes,but not significant enough to show he can be anything special),. We all know Davis is not ready right now,but how do you get ready,you get reps in practice and then get some playing time in games ! This should now be all about getting Davis ready to possibly start in 2010. The main point is that they need to find out NOW if Davis can be the man.If he can be then we draft O line and pass rush,if he does not show enough to make the staff comfortable with him as their future,then we will need to draft or get a QB in free agency to start for us in the future. Davis showed that he has it all as far as tools and intangebles go,unlike Alex,so, the only thing left is to determine if he can put those tools to work for the team on the NFL playing field. Time to get him some playing time . He doesn’t need to start ,although that might be wise,he just needs to get enough playing time in the remainder of the season to let the staff judge if he is the guy they think he is.
And the O line would be made to look better with Davis at QB because he has the quickest release of any QB I have ever seen. While Alex is being hit ,Davis would have already released the ball in most cases.
If this were the start of the season I would say Davis is nowhere near ready to play. But the remainder of this season is only to get ready for next year,not to try to make the playoffs.GET DAVIS SOME PLAYING TIME !
And not only N. Davis but Crabtree and J. Hill and Morgan and Rachael and Balmer and Reggie Smith etc etc,get this team ready to come out smoking next year !
where did you read that Davis was getting practice snaps at QB?
Not refuting it, just never saw that written.
Back up QB
is always the favorite guy on the team. He doesn’t turn this team around. An OL and OC will however.
QB
Sorry, but I have to throw this out there. You were completely sold on Shaun Hill two months ago. Has Alex Smith showed you enough since then to completely change your tune 180?
by David Fucillo (Fooch) on Nov 23, 2009 4:20 PM PST up reply actions
oh fooch i think i love you.
i did not know that about drew. as oh now i will never speak to you about QB’s because if you thought Hill was going to get us to the promise land you were sippin WAY too much of the kool-aid.
i wanted hill to succeed but when i saw him drop back i always thought. “5 yard pass, or he is getting sacked” at times he shocked me but his overall performance was that of someone who isn’t good enough to start.
and now that i know this, drew is a bandwagon jumper. GO HILL… wait… GO SMITH! lol
by whitemike1644 on Nov 23, 2009 6:47 PM PST up reply actions
Bandwagon???
I’ve been a fan of the San Francisco 49ers since 1980…
You talk alot of crap and seriously have nothing to back it up with. You jump on other peoples posts because you cannot formulate your own very well.
This coming from the guy that doesn’t even watch all the games. Please
god you really are blind
i was not questioning you being a team fan i am telling you your a bandwagon QB jumper.
and yes i do watch all the games when the hell did i say i didn’t.
and yes i have formulated my own posts so once again i don’t know what the hell your talking about…
also how many reply’s do you have, what relevance does that have either way everyone has to reply to stuff, how else would we find out how stupid blind SOME people are.
once again thank you for wasting my time by not ready my actual post, and in your effort to trying to make things up to save face. its pretty funny to see.
by whitemike1644 on Nov 24, 2009 10:00 AM PST up reply actions
Absolutely
I think alot of people were wrong and have changed their tunes since. Although I can’t say that anything I said at the time was unwarranted. It’s not like Alex Smith has ever played this well in his career.
If he gives us the best chance to win, then why would I not want to see the guy do well? If we end up with another QB that gives us a better chance I will want him to do well should that happen. And just for the record to cover any other questions you may have in regards to Nate Davis; no, I don’t think he will ever even get in there (as of right now). I personally now, after watching Smith up his level of play, am pulling for him. It’s not like I am bad mouthing Hill either. I still think Hill is a good, solid option as our backup.
I am not sure if you are insuating, like the guy that can’t think for himself above my post here, that I am a bandwagon…or? I don’t see it as being a bandwagon fan if you change your mind on something based on an increase in performance in a current situation, from previous years of not being all that great. Clearly, for the people who are paying attention, Smith is not the same QB as years past. He’s reading the field much better, he is making more accurate throws, he is not always trying to make a play when it’s not there, etc. Just playing overall better football in all the areas that a QB should.
That statement is rather fantastic ! Fantasy is the root word of fantastic,and it is pretty much a fantasy to still think smith can be anything special in the NFL.
He is already making strides in showing that he is capable
Fantastic has 7 definitions there TOP_CAT. Way to pluck the one that suits your point the best although it is not the way I used the word.
Fantastic also means: incredibly great or extreme
And Smith has made great strides since he's started
I actually thought the Green Bay game was his best one. I didn’t see any bad errors. He didn’t stare down his receivers. He seemed to be doing his checkdowns (when he had time anyway). I think his one interception can be placed squarely on Walker for not making his cut.
His passing percentage wasn’t great but he had two passes knocked down and had to throw a bunch away to keep from getting sacked.
The passing percentage...
I think that a majority of the incompletions came in the first half anyway. Jimmy Rayes bunk playcalling helped with that. That and combination with the Oline
Hill obviously
Davis hasn’t had enough reps with the offense to do any good.
Maybe the last couple games of the season you put Davis in to get him experience.
I’m an avid supporter of Davis and I agree with this statement.
Davis needs to get snaps with the starting squad before he plays, and that can only really happen in the off-season.
by hellaninersfan on Nov 23, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
Good question
If we still have a chance to make the playoffs then Hill would seem a lock, just because of experience. Not saying I agree.
However, this season is basically over – barring a Warner injury next week, which could happen!! the Cards were completely hopeless without him.
So, I say if Smith goes down, put in Davis and throw throw throw throw.
Here's a question
The desperation offense, as I like to call it, where we’re down by 30 and we go spread look in the gun and run the limited plays for such an occasion…or so the coaches would have us believe…
are you telling me that those plays, those few plays that we run in those scenarios, are able to be executed and score multiple touchdowns in a half…yet we don’t think Nate Davis could be remotely effective with a watered down playbook?
Although a totally different position, wasn’t Crabtree inserted into the lineup almost immediately (was supposed to be just third down, then a few plays, then all of a sudden 80 percent of the plays in his first game)?
This attitude that there’s no way we’ll be able to judge Nate Davis if he were to come in later this season is hogwash. I go back to my “skills assessment”. Does he make the right decision, an accurate throw, throw it away or take a sack (each at the right time)?
I think you can judge those things.
For what it's worth
Here’s one writer’s take on the fortunes of rookie quarterbacks:
http://sports.yahoo.com/top/blog/roy_s_johnson/post/A-season-of-growing-and-lots-of-pain;_ylt=AtG3xzJwxDYU3DDPgVsViJtDubYF?urn=top,204597
We'll see them again in the playoffs! What channel is it on?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Niners Nation
Related FanShots on Niners Nation
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.
