49ers officially sign Damon Huard and Takeo Spikes

by Fooch on Mar 4, 2009 4:33 PM PST in News Comment 32 comments

FOOCH'S UPDATE 4:35PM: The Huard signing has gone from potential to official. Additionally, the "reported signing" of Takeo Spikes is now an official signing. Some details from the press release:

Damon Huard
Huard (6-3, 218) enters his 13th NFL season after originally being signed as a rookie free agent by the Cincinnati Bengals out of Washington in 1996. A veteran of 64 games with 27 starts, he has posted a 15-12 overall record as a starter during his career with Kansas City (2004-08), New England (2001-03) and Miami (1997-2000). In nine of those starts, Huard recorded a passer rating of 100.0 or higher.

Huard saw action in five games with three starts as a member of the Chiefs in 2008, completing 50-of-81 passes for 477 yards with two touchdowns and four interceptions. A year prior, he started a career-high 10 games and completed 206-of-332 passes for 2,257 yards with 11 touchdowns and 13 interceptions. In 2005, Huard posted a career-high 98.0 passer rating after starting eight games and completing 148-of-244 passes for 1,878 yards with 11 touchdowns and only one interception.

Prior to his time with the Chiefs, Huard’s most significant action occurred in 1999 as a member of the Dolphins. He started five games that season, completing 125-of-216 passes for 1,288 yards with eight touchdowns and four interceptions.

Takeo Spikes
Spikes (6-2, 242) enters his 12th NFL season after originally being drafted in the first round (13th pick overall) of the 1998 Draft by the Cincinnati Bengals out of Auburn. A two-time Pro Bowler (2003-04) and one-time All-Pro (2004), Spikes has played in 156 games with 152 starts and has amassed 1,299 tackles, 23.5 sacks, 16 forced fumbles, 15 fumble recoveries, 15 interceptions and 50 passes defensed in his career.

In his first season with the 49ers in 2008, Spikes played in all 16 games with 13 starts, ranking second on the team with 122 tackles to go along with three interceptions, two forced fumbles, one fumble recovery, one sack and five passes defensed.
____________________________________

Quick thanks to bayboy for spotting this first and rolling out the FanShot. I think it's safe to roll this up to the front page. Maiocco is reporting that the 49ers are close to inking QB Damon Huard to a contract.

It's not surprising that Kansas City would let Huard walk since they've got Cassel now and a cheap, solid backup option in Tyler Thigpen. I have to say, as a potential backup, and only a backup, I like this move. Damon Huard is certainly not a stud, but as an emergency option I think he's a decent guy to have. I know many folks were clamoring for Byron Leftwich, but I guess we're stuck with the older option.

Considering the team tried to bring in Bruce Gradkowski off waivers, this shouldn't exactly be a stunning development. Depending on how the draft goes, as one person said, Huard is very likely to end up as fodder. If the 49ers draft a QB and bring back Alex Smith, the rookie would be the safer bet as the #3 than Huard. Either way, it's not a major impact move.

0 recs | Comment 32 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Yessssss

A guy named Da-mon on our team!

MURS for President!!!!!!!

by jtoj on Mar 4, 2009 2:35 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Well i think you guys can end all this QB talk for this year. its going to be either hill or smith. i don’t see how they would be looking for a QB at #10.
We will have to just go through and get better in other areas. I am still positive, the titans did very well with kerry kollins, given we are not the titans but hey anything can happen.
If i would have to you that the titans and kerry were going to be a top 5 team last year 90% of people would have told me i was insane.

by whitemike1644 on Mar 4, 2009 2:44 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'm getting sold on the idea of draft a QB

I wouldn’t mind having Sanchez wearing Red and Gold. He’s a pro style QB and unlike Smith a born leader. I’m getting enticed by all of these mock drafts and smith haters to move forward and draft Sanchez at #10. I think he’ll still be there at 16 so maybe we can move down a couple of picks to beat the Jets or Chicago from drafting him at # 17 or 18 respectively.

Joe and Steve were under the same system for years... don't expect Smith to be super so soon.

by bayboy on Mar 4, 2009 3:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

drafting*

Joe and Steve were under the same system for years... don't expect Smith to be super so soon.

by bayboy on Mar 4, 2009 3:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Wasn’t Sanchez a disappointment with USC for most of the year as that team rode a ridiculous college defense while he worked out a few kinks?

I think Sanchez has some serious question marks, and in most other years he might not even be a first round pick.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2009 5:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I really hope Scot is going to release Smith.

http://www.runboard.com/bsanfran49ers

by supraman on Mar 4, 2009 2:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I've always liked huard as a backup

he’s a reliable guy to bring in if you need him and I would imagine he could be a good mentor for younger guys.

was he the QB when KC shut us out big a few years ago?

by foosball4949 on Mar 4, 2009 3:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

41-0 if I remember correctly

by foosball4949 on Mar 4, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

New Quarterback

Why aren’t we looking at Byron Leftwitch, who is younger and can pick up his slack with Mike Johnson.

by eadog on Mar 4, 2009 3:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

damon huard = trent dilfer

im a huge dilfer fan but why do the 9ers keep doing this? Why not make some moves try to open up a trade for a big name or something. Were are so sold on our other QB’s who are back ups at best it baffles me. Leftwitch is still out there and Im sur there are more viable options even at back up then Huard.

by BarnettBeBallin on Mar 4, 2009 3:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Like whom, exactly?

by Viliphied on Mar 4, 2009 3:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Uh.

Because a trade is a two way street? It isn’t like Madden where you can keep shoving draft picks (or players) down a team’s throat until the meter says they’ll accept. Teams may be offering their QBs, but the 49ers don’t necessarily have anything they want to give up that another team would want.

As for Leftwich, who’s to say the team hasn’t already kicked those tires? Maybe Leftwich’s agent is asking for a ridiculous amount of money.

Basically, without knowing the inner workings of the franchise, it’s a little hard (and premature) to call the team out on “inaction.”

Besides, Huard is more than likely here to be an extra body for pre and post draft minicamps.

by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2009 3:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Signing Huard doesn’t mean that we have to keep Huard.

My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.

by howtheyscored on Mar 4, 2009 5:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

agree

Blind devotion.

by ProfessorBigelow on Mar 4, 2009 5:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

What would you have McCloughan do specifically?

by Brendan Scolari on Mar 4, 2009 6:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The new kid

Hello all. Long time reader, first time poster, Lifetime fan! I think that it is pretty clear that Huard is being signed as a mini-camp arm. The Niners are going to take a QB at some point in the draft and I don’t see them carrying 4 QB’s on the 52 man roster. I guess it is possible, after all of the Warner shennanagin’s (sp?) Alex Smith chooses not to restructure his deal and we are back to 2 Qb’s before the draft, but I think Smith is staying in SF. If the team wasn’t confident that they would be drafting a QB, we would have seen a Losman, or Leftwitch, or Garcia signing instead, someone who could actually compete and contribute. Huards not a hack but there is a reason that he was 3 deep on the Chiefs (who had a worse record than ours) depth chart. I am not worried about Huard.

Speaking of the draft and QB… With many so called experts saying the Lions would be crazy to pass on Curry, and the Chiefs trading for Cassel; the possibility of Stafford sliding to the Niners at #10 is increasingly more likely. I don’t like Sanchez with that pick but I think it would be difficult for the team to pass on Stafford at #10. What do you guys think?

by SanFranSoldier on Mar 4, 2009 4:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Stafford vs Sanchez

I think it’s all a matter of philosophy. The more I read about the two (and the more methodrampage hammers it home), the more it seems the primary difference is that Stafford is more pro-ready, while Sanchez has a higher ceiling. Basically, Stafford fits well with a team that needs a QB to step in immediately and not stink up the joint while Sanchez may need a year or two to gain a little bit of “seasoning.”

If it came down to the 49ers deciding between the two, I’m leaning toward them taking Sanchez, as they HAVE a couple of years to groom a new QB. I guess it depends on how much confidence one has in Shaun Hill being able to “adequately” run the offense. If Singletary and Raye stick to Singletary’s original “vision” for the offense, Hill should be able to run it just fine.

by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2009 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and welcome by the way.

by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2009 4:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't expect the Niners use their top pick on a QB

White from West Virginia might be gone by the time the Niners grab a quarterback. In fact, they may skip drafting one this year because next year’s crop is a lot deeper. Maybe I’m a little nervous about first round draft picks for quarterbacks, but I think I could pass on Stafford (who wouldn’t be around anyway) and Sanchez.

by Bob On The Coast on Mar 4, 2009 4:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah.

I also agree they probably won’t take one, especially not with the #10 pick. I was just answering the hypothetical posted by SanFranSoldier about who would the team take if they did take a QB.

I think they’ll look for a value QB in any round 3rd and beyond, but they’re not going to force themselves to take a QB.

by sfgfan on Mar 4, 2009 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

They don't NEED a QB

A really good, reliable QB would be good to have, providing some long-needed security in the position, but there are much, much, MUCH greater needs than a QB, like an OT, or a bullrushing DE. That is why people are foolish for believing the niners will draft a QB with the #10 – it doesn’t make sense for the value of the pick and the needs of the team.

Now, 3rd or 4th round, sure, why not. QB is still a need, but not a NEED like OT or DE is. Besides, if the whole QB thing doesn’t work out this season, there will be a plethora of QBs in the draft next season (Bradford, Tebow, McCoy, Clausen, Devlin) and potentially some valuable free agents (Orton, E. Manning, Rothlisberger, Rivers) available if we NEED QBs.

For now, I’m good with Shaun Hill (YOU HEAR THAT JOSH G?! I’M ON THE BANDWAGON) and Alex Smith (with a restructured contract).

Blind devotion.

by ProfessorBigelow on Mar 4, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's God's fault

Warner, per Maiocco, regarding his visit to Santa Clara:

"I told my wife probably 45 minutes into it that I just felt God say, ’You’re supposed to be in Arizona.’ "

I wonder if God calls audibles in the Cardinals’ huddle.

by Bob On The Coast on Mar 4, 2009 4:45 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I always thought God was a Packers fan

I vaguely recall Reggie White saying God told him to go to the Packers as a free agent. Does that mean God’s a front-runner?

by Fooch on Mar 4, 2009 4:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

That's twice now God!!!

I will never forget that afternoon ESPN Sportscenter broke Reggie White’s decision. My brother in law was a Skins fan and ESPN teased the hell out of both us. They opened the program with breaking news on the signing and had the 49ers logo on the monitor. They take 30 seconds to explain why Reggie would be a good Niner than they say he’s decided not to sign with San Fran. They show the Skins logo and my brother in law erupts . . . than go thru the same song and dance with him. Eventually they say he signed with the Packers and God told him he would win a championship with GB.

I was pissed and definitely thought God had lied to him, the Packers had been horrible for a decade. Yes, he got a SB but he would have won 3 if he signed with the 49ers.

by bignerd on Mar 4, 2009 7:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I am a member of the Arrowhead Pride Chiefs blog

and noticed that the 49ers just signed Huard. I was curious as to what you all think of Alex Smith and the possibility that he could play again and even if somewhere else do you all think he could succeed?

"The spirit, the will to win, and the will to excel are the things that endure. These qualities are so much more important than the events that occur." - Vince Lombardi

by Shawn on Mar 4, 2009 5:38 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Alex Smith

Welcome Shawn. He’ll definitely play again, although it remains to be seen whether it’s with the 49ers or elsewhere. I do think he could be a very solid QB in this league at some point. Not a superstar, but still solid.

by Fooch on Mar 4, 2009 6:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I think he could be a superstar if he went to a place like Indy and sat behind Peyton for a while.

by Viliphied on Mar 4, 2009 6:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Do we plan on losing?

I don’t think the Niners make it through the draft with out taking a QB. I can see logic in drafting a late rounder this year because it might be easier to cut him if we don’t win and are looking for one of the top arms next year. Or, A Smith could be the odd man out next season, assuming we re-structure of course. Unless Mc “Turn your head and” Cloughan believes it is very likely that we will be picking high in next years draft, I think they have to take a QB at some point. Either that or sign Losman or Leftwitch. I just cannot imagine that the plan is to face the season with Hill/Smith/Huard rounding out the QB corps unless we plan on losing. I’m not saying that we can’t win with Hill, I like the guy; but, Hill is just a seat warmer that we hope is going to play mistake-free football long enough to win the division. If we have a chance to upgrade, we have to take it. Here’s the deal: We need a QB of the future to start riding the pine this season. I don’t really want them to take a QB at #10 either but Stafford has to be awfully tempting if he falls. Sanchez too from what I’m hearing, but there is specific concern about his lack of experience. I just don’t see any reason to take Huard over Losman or Leftwitch unless he is nothing but a camp arm .

by SanFranSoldier on Mar 4, 2009 5:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

as a miami native...

…i have first hand familiarity with huard. trust me, he’s garbage. if he’s any higher than 3rd on the depth chart for the 49ers in 2009, they’re in a lot of trouble.

by Florida Danny on Mar 4, 2009 6:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

And you didn't even have to use...

DVOA to post that . ; )

Well, we're waiting....

by drummer on Mar 4, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

haha...

dvoa measures “efficiency” not “garbage” ;-)

by Florida Danny on Mar 4, 2009 7:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm actually relieved

So far are QB’s were Hill and Smith. I had my doubts that we would finish the season with a QB. I’m fine with Huard as #3, it still gives are Defense and Special teams a chance to pull out some games.

No Sanchez, No Stafford . . . $50 million on a guaranteed flop will cost the team another 4 years. There will be 5-6 better QB’s in next years draft that we can get for a lower first round pick.

by bignerd on Mar 4, 2009 7:56 PM PST reply actions 0 recs