49ers Release QB Damon Huard; Nate Davis your new 3rd string QB
by pwarren85 on Sep 1, 2009 5:51 PM PDT
Email
PrintFooch's Note: I thought I'd hijack this FanPost (thanks for getting it up pwarren85) and move it to the front with some additional information courtesy of the 49ers. The 49ers have indeed released QB Damon Huard, meaning Nate Davis is no worse than the #3 QB (see how I worked that one?!)
Coach Singletary issued a statement on the release:
"I am thankful that we were lucky enough to have Damon here with us this offseason," said head coach Mike Singletary. "He was a professional in every sense. What he did with our quarterbacks was outstanding. He helped them to have a better idea about what it takes to be a pro. Not only did he provide them great tips throughout, but he helped build their confidence. It’s one thing to hear what you need to do to get better from someone who never played the game, but when you hear it from a guy like Damon you take his words to heart. I really appreciate his professionalism and his personality."
A veteran of 13 NFL seasons, Huard has thrown for 6,303 yard and 33 touchdowns in his career. He spent time with the Miami Dolphins, New England Patriots and Kansas City Chiefs before signing with the 49ers this past March. The 36-year-old native of Puyallup, WA, starred collegiately at Washington.
The 49ers have announced the release of veteran quarterback Damon Huard, which signals that rookie Nate Davis has won a roster spot.
The 49ers have 73 players under contract with this move. Don't be surprised if they add veteran backups at tackle and/or fullback before the start of the regular season.
basically what everyone was hoping for. so thats good, should see a ton of playin time next week.
thanks to maiocco
word
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.
184 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
got it...thanks
Checked my email and had the press release.
by David Fucillo on Sep 1, 2009 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions
We I guess thay settles that...
So here we go, the QB situation (at least to start) has been settled.
Any news on Crabbtree?
The 49ers have 73 players under contract with this move.
Now that we are down to 73 now would be a good time to sign him before the final cuts next week.
I just came by to tell everyone that I told you so.
Now when do we trade Alex Smith?
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
Maybe this move saves Smith until Davis can continue to develop for a year or so.
The season begins in 3...2...
http://twitter.com/BloggingTheBoys
by Aaron Novinger on Sep 1, 2009 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions
My thoughts exactly,,,
That would leave Hill to help fill the roll “old timer” to smooth out the edges..(or not). This was the logical move. So would that mean that the mantra for the future is Davis to Crabbtree???.. I don’t know it doesn’t that catchy (pun intended) ring to it…. Stayyyyy..tuned …
No
Davis to Davis or Davis to Morgan…………….Crabs is re-entering the draft right??
AKA.............Optimist Prime
"Me, I want what's coming to me" And what's that? "The world Chico, and everything in it"
Who the @#$%# knows what this jerk is going to do????
Personally I don’t care.. I was just curious. I understand that the only other hold out besides monytree signed yesterday and broke a bone in his foot today and will out for 3-4 weeks. Isn’t that a pisser… you finally sign your number one draft pick and he brakes his foot on the first day of practice…no contact none the less.. Go figure????
Touch of karma?
Certainly why it helps to work your way into camp instead of just showing up late and not in football shape. Especially when you’re a big, heavy lineman.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Woa i was kidding
TRue niner fan I can see it in your key stroke!!…….lol
AKA.............Optimist Prime
"Me, I want what's coming to me" And what's that? "The world Chico, and everything in it"
I think...
… he was kidding about trading Smith.
Well, I’m glad somebody got it.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 2, 2009 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions
how come..
no one ever get that what u say is a joke lol….
I’m more surprised when people take me seriously at McCoveyChroncles than when they take me seriously here. My reputation as a joker isn’t quite as established in these parts for some reason.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 2, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Did I ever tell you how I got these scars?
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 3, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions
the real surprise
is that Alex Smith was not released and Huard and Davis retained. McGM is still grasping at the straw/delusion that Alex Smith has what it takes to succeed at QB in the NFL. He doesn’t and the right thing from the team point of view would have been to release him.
Davis is still quite raw but he’ll learn and adapt. Putting Davis in would be the wrong thing to do except in an emergency, but give him a year to learn and develop and he has a chance at becoming a good QB.
We still have Huard’s phone number in case we need him but with the amount of QB injuries and such he’ll probably get signed soon by some team that needs depth. He won’t be unemployed for long.
It’s actually not a surprise at all. Mc Boo Foo isn’t grasping at straws that Smith has what it takes. If that were the case, we wouldn’t even be bothering with this “Hill is the starter” stuff.
Alex Smith is the logical backup for this team. It makes sense. It is not surprising.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 1, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Smith is the logical BU QB at least for now
Based on the limited amount I have seen him play. Davis will be chomping at the bits to be the Starter some point next year or the year after. At that point Smith will be extra baggage and released.
Not Surprising
but what does Smith bring to the backup role that Huard doesn’t? Smith consistently plays terribly. Huard brings experience and actually plays like a competent NFL QB. Smith also has questions about his shoulder… what’s so logical about keeping Smith?
Smith consistently plays terribly.
That’s not exactly true. The last time we saw Smith healthy, he was playing well enough to be a very competent backup. Since he hasn’t been healthy in so long, we don’t really know what we have in him anymore. We do know what we have in Huard: not very much.
Smith could be no better or worse than he was in 2006, but I think it makes sense to play the odds that he can be at least that good. Which would be a competent backup with some possible upside.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 1, 2009 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Smith hasn't looked like a 'very competent backup' in my opinion.
He hasn’t been a turnover machine, but nothing that would indicate he’s a fine game-manager that you want in a back-up. Huard has at least looked capable of great pocket presence, professional reads, and sound decision making. Although you are certainly right about the upside.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 9:20 AM PDT up reply actions
I think you might be overestimating how good most backups are. I don’t think that you would find very many backups around the league who are actually fine game managers.
And, of course, your opinion of Smith is lower than mine to begin with, so maybe we’re on the same page and you just see him as a worse quarterback than I do. In which case, that’s fine. I definitely believe most teams would be fine with him as their primary backup, though.
I think Huard is a stable option, but in all honesty I don’t see him as being that much better than Smith either.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 2, 2009 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions
rec'd for Mc Boo Foo
my new favorite nickname for someone ever
It was Johnny Hopkins, and Sloan Kettering, and they were blazin that s*** up everyday.
Yea Mc Boo Foo got that 1 right
2 bad he chose not to address the two biggest needs in the draft: a pass rusher and a tackle.
You also have to...
… factor in the fact that Smith got A LOT more practice reps with Raye’s offense. He’s more ready to use the playbook if needed. Of course, the question remains about his effectiveness with said playbook.
In any case, as of right now, the QB situation is pretty bad. Hill is no world beater, and Alex Smith isn’t either. If Smith had one and Hill was the backup, it’d still be a bad situation. Basically, if the 49ers starting QB goes down, it doesn’t matter if Smith or Huard come in to play, the team is in deep doodoo.
Wow, that's more pessimism than I've heard out of you, sfgfan
I mean sure, the passing game has been pretty anemic in the preseason, but isn’t that partly a function of play calling? Aren’t the reports of impressive showings by Smith in training camp simply getting trumped by a misthrown screen pass here?
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Not necessarily.
I’m not saying they don’t have room to grow. Right now, though, I don’t feel like they will. I really like Smith and I like Hill. I think they’re both fully capable of running this offense if everyone else around them does their jobs. Basically, I don’t think Hill and Smith are playmakers, and they depend on their teammates VERY heavily.
I agree that maybe the anemic offense is a product of bland playcalling because of the preseason. However, the defenses generally aren’t doing anything special in playcalling either, so it’s pretty much man-to-man and the 49ers players are having a tough time beating their men. I mean this all the way around, from the offensive line to the WRs. The 49ers WRs just aren’t beating DBs and the offensive line has shown some struggles in pass-pro.
I guess it was wrong for me to lay the potential failures of their surroundings on them, but that’s basically my point. Hill is now BY FAR the best choice for the team, as he’s going to become the QB most familiar with Raye’s system and playcalling (by virtue of practice reps and game action). If he goes down, the offense that hasn’t shown to be anything special is then left in the hands of a QB who was previously running the scout team offense.
I still think that the team can succeed. I just hate how people think that Huard somehow makes the 49ers chances to win greater than Smith. The probability of all three QBs being the same kind of mediocre is a lot greater than the probability of Huard being anything remotely better than Smith or Hill.
OK
The probability of all three QBs being the same kind of mediocre is a lot greater than the probability of Huard being anything remotely better than Smith or Hill.
I see that. Many here would say that McC dumped Huard because he wants Smith to prove him right, and whatever merit that has, it’s secondary to the fact that Huard and Smith were about even in terms of their performance and Smith remains a guy with more potential upside.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Too much was put into Smith
to let him go at this point in time. I think it is the right, settling move, and shows wisdom to do it before the San Diego game.
i agree
but sometimes u need to let it go so maybe he can become a great QB somewhere else.
because the way its looking davis is more productive then smith IMO
It’s not even that. If we had a better option on staff, I think that all that time we’ve put behind Smith should count for exactly zero. Damon Huard and Alex Smith are pretty comparable options to backup (this depends on your POV, I guess, as some people think Smith is much better than Huard and some people think Huard is much better than Smith… I think they’re probably about the same right now), and Smith is younger and has a higher upside. Unless you honestly think that Huard is much more talented than Smith, the decision there is pretty easy.
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 1, 2009 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions
the real surprise is that Alex Smith was not released and Huard and Davis retained.
/facepalm
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
oh, do you mean...
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
by grantmp on Sep 1, 2009 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Since you asked:
Context, people. More context is good. Less context is bad. If you're willing to be reductive, then you're willing to be wrong.
by howtheyscored on Sep 1, 2009 9:14 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
hey i have that exact same chair
It was Johnny Hopkins, and Sloan Kettering, and they were blazin that s*** up everyday.
Goodbye Huard, Congrats to Davis
And I mean that with all respect. I believe what Sing said about Huard being a pro’s pro and providing veteran advice and for that I am grateful. He was/is also more familiar with Raye’s system so I’m sure he was a coach on the field for QBs and others alike. His presence on the team was a good thing. This is why you either want your 3rd stringer to be a young project or old wiley vet.
That they let Huard go now instead of waiting to see if other teams have a QB injury speaks to how much they respect him and want him to have a chance to latch onto a team of his choice now.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Huard
Hey its a priviledge to play in the NFL and Huard has shown he new that and acted how a man is suppose to act….he was a team player and helped the younger people…..maybe crabtree can take notice
as for DAVIS….i been waiting for this since i seen his highlights a year ago and i love this guy!
KC
i agreeand hell why not they need him…or maybe trade alex smith IMO AND GET A DRAFT PICK AND RESIGN HUARD FOR LESS OMFG!!!!
I heard the Pats were interested
AKA.............Optimist Prime
"Me, I want what's coming to me" And what's that? "The world Chico, and everything in it"
the pats are interested in smith???
i would like to know what they are offering exactly… lets be honest… say he gets better… nate davis is better now so he will be better when that time comes… alex will always be a over paid back up as of right now… which pisses me off because i wanted smith to shine then we won’t have to worry about our QB situation but i guess you can only hope.
by whitemike1644 on Sep 1, 2009 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions
sorry I meant Huard
AKA.............Optimist Prime
"Me, I want what's coming to me" And what's that? "The world Chico, and everything in it"
Huard was cut early because the 49ers wanted to give him time to sign with another team before the season started. It’s not as though Huard under performed, it’s just that Davis had such an excellent preseason.
Yeah.
The youth movement is a significant factor in this decision, too.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
excellent draft class?
and did curtis taylor get cut, because i heard he had been cut by due to injury
The injury questions at other positions...
… probably also factored in big time.
Injuries
when you’ve got multiple people (Brooks, B.Jones) who you’ll need on the roster later on—but who can’t contribute right now, you’ve got to grab roster spots from somewhere.
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
It’s not as though Huard under performed
Yeah it kind of is actually. If Huard had any track record of success he’d be on the team, but he’s old and not very good.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 1, 2009 10:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Or
The dye was cast with Hill and Smith leaving just one spot open for Huard and Davis. The 2nd best performing QB in the preseason was Huard.
I don't know why preseason matters much for a vet like Huard
He is what he is. A couple preseason passes shouldn’t outweigh 10 years in the NFL.
by Brendan Scolari on Sep 2, 2009 7:22 AM PDT up reply actions
woohoo
just happy the kid is getting a chance. hes proved showed that he can step up and maybe lead one day… and hes on the field , not at home like shmicheal shcrabtree
NINERS 4 LIFE
So Does Nate Get To Start at San Diego Now? Please?
I say either let Nate play the whole game (and watch as we eat San Diego 52-14), or let Smith or Hill play a couple of series and then put Davis in. What do you all think?
by Riding The F Train on Sep 1, 2009 7:02 PM PDT reply actions
- I want 1 successful series with Hill.
- I then want Smith to play the remainder of the 1st half which should include a 2-minute drill (like it or not he’s the backup and hasn’t played much in two years so if he’s first off the bench he will need more reps). #3 Then Davis plays the entire 2nd half and regardless of score runs a normal offense with a lean toward more pass plays, maybe even one drive of all hurry up. Let’s see what the kid can do.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Yeah...
Unfortunately, I think it’s important to get Hill some time in SD. He’s been pretty meh all pre-season, so I think it would be good for him and the team both to have him lead at least one touchdown drive.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
logical, smart, and considerate move by the Niners
as people have said, he wasn’t needed, and now he can sign somewhere else before the season.
Still defending Rich Aurilia, and the Niners' classic unis
Great Move!
Now we can focus on what pieces we need for next year. The ones who do not play up to the coaches standards, will have to sweat next year. We have 2 picks and I believe we do not have spend them on a quarterback next year. Let’s Go Niners!
Cream
Hopefully nate can get a series with the starters this week
Since we probably wont see him again this season unless hill gets injured
Won't happen
After listening to Jimmy Raye on the niners website, due to the competition of Smith and Hill, Davis wasn’t allowed a lot of reps so I doubt that he will play with the starters, however later in the season he has the oppurtunity to pass Smith on the depth chart. As of now he is only the 3rd QB. In the case if Hill’s injury Smith will probably get the nod. I know it sucks but I personally call it the Rex Grossman Rule. (GM drafted trash and couldn’t live with it)
AKA.............Optimist Prime
"Me, I want what's coming to me" And what's that? "The world Chico, and everything in it"
No seeting Davis means we are winning
I don’t see the rush to play Davis; I want Hill to be successful and do what he’s done before, win games. Davis is on the team and will have his turn in the future. Ditto in respect to Smith. Though I favor Hill, I’ll be rooting for Smith to WIN (and not just be a figure of potential) if Hill goes down or is ineffective. Let’s hear if for three workable quarterbacks! Let’s hear it for winning THIS YEAR.
Yikes, are you suggesting that if the team is losing, they'll PLAY Davis?
Isn’t that exactly what they did to Alex Smith? Isn’t that the worst thing you can do to a guy who may have difficulty picking up the playbook?
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
No, no
I’m agreeing with the sentiments “Let’s hear it for winning THIS YEAR” and “I don’t see the rush to play Davis; I want Hill to be successful.” If this team begins to fail and between Hill and Smith one is injured and the other plays poorly, I would support playing Davis (or any young QB on a roster) in December. If you’re not competing for a playoff spot then you’ve got to find out what you have to properly address off-season needs. What happened to Smith was a bit different.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Still...
I find it hard to imagine a scenario in which I’ll be happy seeing Davis on the field this year—other than having him kneel down when the Niners are killing the clock at the end of a Super Bowl victory.
My point is that “finding out what you have” often involves playing a guy who’s not ready; and this can really retard a guys development. Aaron Rodgers wouldn’t have come in and done as well as he did last year except for the fact that he had years to learn the Packer WCO. If the whole point of bringing in Jimmy Raye and Mike Johnson is continuity—i.e. having time to develop a guy to the point that he’s ready to step in—why would you potentially jeopardize Davis by throwing him in there?
Really, my question is, how is this scenario different than what happened with Smith?
Morgan breaks through in 2009!
Smith was a like a 16 year old being given a crappy car and asked to win a race with it and when he lost he was verbally abused by EVERYONE… that has to mentally destroy someone…did i mention his friend died while racing?
With Davis (if he does go in) I think fans will be smart enough to not verbally abuse the kid and say “good job man, you’re a rookie, you can only get better.” Or he may (BIG MAY) shine and make us all cry tears of joy… very unlikely but a man can dream…
He hasn't had difficulty picking up the playbook
He had minimal reps due to the QB competition to establish the starter.
AKA.............Optimist Prime
"Me, I want what's coming to me" And what's that? "The world Chico, and everything in it"
I think...
… that if the 49ers sucked, fans still wouldn’t see Davis step on the field. The only way Davis touches the field is if Hill AND Smith are injured. I’m hoping the 49ers have learned their lesson about rushing rookie QBs into the game, especially a rookie QB who didn’t get very many training camp reps.
You'll all be sorry for this! ::Shakes fist angrily::
Unceremoniously dumping a native Washingtonian stud like Huard! Grr
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
Why don’t you guys pick him up for Week 2 so he can dissect the 49er playbook for the Hawks coaching staff.
Yeah, thatll be a long session
“So Damon, what can you tell us about the 49ers offense?”
“Well, on first down the hand it off to Frank Gore. and then on 2nd down, they hand it off to Frank Gore. And it gets real tricky on 3rd…..they pass it to Frank Gore. Sometimes to mix things up they pitch it to Frank Gore. Hope that helps”
by Sloan on Sep 2, 2009 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hahaha
But I wouldn’t really approve of a Huard signing. His brother Brock on the Seahawks a few years back was enough for me, to be frank. Seneca Wallace is a great back-up, and we might have a low-risk late-round QB prospect in Mike Teel worth developing. If Teel is cut, though, I suppose obtaining Huard for symbolic purposes wouldn’t annoy me.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions
I can only hope
Beats last year’s offense with Martz.
“They know we are going to hand it to Frank Gore so lets pass on 1st down. Defense is still showing run defense so let’s pass it again on 2nd down. Well it’s 3rd down, to late to hand it off to Frank Gore so lets put the ball in JTO’s hands to see if he can make play.”
By compensating..
Because they have no QBs? At least Martz tried to make something out of them.
Well, we're waiting....
You didn't like Hostler's genius?
I mean come one no one expects a delay draw on 3rd and 15… NO ONE..
Deep passes on 2nd and In… We blew defenses’ minds with that sort of trickery…
Yeah I’m being sarcastic…
Deep passes...
… on second and inches should work if you actually use playaction after establishing the run.
say what you want. but the way we moved the ball in the preseason on the ground and late in the game (davis throwing) i’m pretty happy with it.
i would like to know how many offensive turnovers we had… i only remember the 1 from smith on that high ball. just looked it up 2!!!
other than that i can’t complain about the offense really hell we are leading all of nfl preseason with rushing yards. we only have 2 turnovers on offense in 3 games. and we are 5th in points for. and 4th in points against.
yea its not the montana/rice era we would like to see, but what the titans did last year i think we can replicate, play solid D, move the ball on offense with a solid running game, decent QB play without turnovers and your good. we have the talent to do it just the pass rush needs to come along to give our DB’s a chance to make plays will make or break our season.
You're spot on with one exception
We don’t have the Titans’ pass rush. Everything else you suggest is possible. That the titans did what they did in the AFC tells me that even without that level of pass rush, our being in the NFC makes it a bit easier. That’s why I think 10-6 is not a dream.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
You realize..
That 2 other teams in our division are gonna be run first, don’t you?
Well, we're waiting....
I do
And having four games vs Seattle and St. Louis provides three of the wins to get us to ten.
I also believe the Niners have superior talent to St. Louis and are a bit better than Seattle. So what their respective philopshies are is of no concern to me. Run or throw first, Rams are winning 5 games tops. Run or throw first, Seahawks will be a competitive team that goes around 8-8, give or take a win.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
SEA is a favorite..
to compete with AZ for the division. The 49ers barely beat STL in the last game last season. To beat those team twice would mean that the 49ers have a solid QB in place. I’ll give STL, but even that’s a toss up for a sweep.
Well, we're waiting....
Stop the last year talk
Seattle was 4-12. St. Louis was 2-14. Seems you should be on their board telling them how they can’t do well this year based on last year. Barely winning is better than barely losing, though I notice you forgot to mention the blowout of STL at the Stick. Did you also acount that when playing in STL, the Niners were playing their fourth road game in five weeks? That’s five different cities in consecutive weeks at the end of the season. These guys get physically and mentally tired just like all athletes. Good teams find a way to win on their worst day.
Seattle is no more a favorite that SF. Based on your preference to look back a year, SF is more the favorite. And since AZ “barely” beat SF due more to Niner mistakes, seems you should be picking the Niners to win the division this season.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
I see the 49ers as a 7 win team..
And that’s being optimistic. SEA has a ton of injuries, and STL gave up on their coaches. I don’t see the 49ers dramatically improved with the exception of possibly being able to run the football down the opposition’s throat. So, there goes you trying to shoehorn things into my opinion here.
My guess is by the time the 49ers play their second games against SEA and STL, they will be on their backup QB. Which one is the real question here.
Well, we're waiting....
Not trying to shoehorn
Just poking holes in your argument. That you see them as a 7 win team is an opinion and one that I can understand. I said on some long ago post that I see their floor as 6-10 and ceiling as 11-5. Finishing with 7 or 8 wins would be right in the middle of that. I happen to be a bit more optimistic than you and see a 9 or 10 win season.
My problem is with your argument. You base everything on last year, yet two of the teams in the West finsihed behind SF last year so you should use the same criteria when comparing SF to them. I just want consistiency. Experts who use the previous year as the main poin in their argument often look foolish when the new season begins: who saw ATL making the playoffs? AZ in the Super Bowl? Miami winning their division? Green Bay falling to 6-10? Dallas out of the playoffs? The previous year tells a story but it’s often an outdated one.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Well..
I don’t throw out a season with the bathwater just to prove an argument. It’s based on performance, where they have improved on their weaknesses, and the fluctuation of talent. Based on your criteria of “Who knew”, then STL has a shot at being a surprise team and win the division.
Well, we're waiting....
Yep
There’s an argument to be made, though far fetched, in favor of that. I don’t see it, but when you have a new coach that is better (or appears better) than the previous guy, good things can happen. Especially if it’s a young team, since you never know how far the upside goes. It also helps to sneak up on other teams. This would be in Spags’ favor. It’s in Sing’s favor. The problem with Mora is that he is not a better coach than Holmgren and I believe Seattle fans may take a year or two to appreicate that but it will become apparent.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Oh, you're one of those 'Shaun Hill 7-3 gon' take us to the promised land' folk, right?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions
We need a way of "marking" these people.
I want to know who I should be arguing with and who I should dismiss as insane.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
Not sure who has said that Hill would take us to the promised land but it certainly was not I. I like him for what he is: a guy who can start and win games with this team, this year, this schedule. Perhaps even next year. Limit mistakes, lead the offense and make a few plays. Delhomme without the risky throws. He wouldn’t be the first and won’t be the last to be the guy who holds down the position until we have the man I do no seeing him hoisting a SB trophy unless it’s as a backup on who watched from the bench. But I’m not expecting a SB win this season. I’m expecting to get better and he can help with that.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
I never understood this logic.
It basically amounts to ’If we use Shaun Hill as little as possible and minimize the role of a QB in the offense, we can succeed with Shaun Hill"
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
I see their floor as 6-10 and ceiling as 11-5.
You are quite the optimist. Differing opinion and all that, but I see their floor being closer to 4 wins and the ceiling being more around 10 wins, if that.
No harm there
The fun and frustrating thing is none of us really know what we’ve got. We’re not like folks in Pittsburgh or New England. I remember when we used to have that level of established comfort and would enjoy being there again after a few seasons.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
The 49ers went 7-9 practically fully healthy with one of the NFL's easiest schedules.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Easiest?
Here we go:
- NFC East and AFC East. Hmm. Of those eight opponents only one finished with a losing record (BUF, 7-9) You sure about weak?
- Same schedule with only two exceptions of what the other NFC West clubs played. And yet Seattle and STL won fewer games combined.
You gotta have a better argument than this.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
How about...
the 49ers opposition in the second half won a total of 2 games of thier respective second halves?
Well, we're waiting....
Guess when the schedule got tougher with teams like SF they couldn’t win. Right?
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Actually, I have to clarify...
The teams the 49ers beat in the second half of the sched won 2 games total.
So they lost to the good teams, even the “who knew” teams, and beat the teams on the downside of their scheds.
Well, we're waiting....
That's why you play 16
Seasons fluctuate. Weather, strength of schedule, conditioning, player development, or some teams just falt our quitting or not responding well to adversity all come into play. That SF didn’t get worse as the year went on speaks well of their character and talent development. it also says the players responded to Sing and Hill for that matter.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
They only teams they beat..
Were worse by a few points. They easily could have lost 2 in BUF and STL. They hardly outplayed STL in their second game.
You know, I watch the games. Just to let you know.
Well, we're waiting....
i think the first game was the reason why they almost lost the second
too much overconfidence… I think that’s what happened to a lot of teams last season… they underestimated us… it shouldnt happen as much this season…
Excuses
Stop, really, stop. A hurt Favre? Oh dear. Nice to make excuses for everyone else yet none for SF… Coulda woulda shoulda. They also coulda beaten the Patriots, woulda beat the Cards in the opener and Saints and shoulda beat the Eagles and Cardinals the second time. Didn’t happen. So they likely ended up right where they deserved to be 7-9. If you’re going to make excuses for their wins why not also use the same logic and say they could have been 12-4? Things tend to even out over 16 games. As Parcells is fond of saying, “you are what your record is.” I happen to think that record will be better this season.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
They're not excuses..
They’re not as good as you try to convince me of. You’re the one that is not showing anything of merit. Just a bunch of platitudes, straw, and nonsense. You really have nothing but conjecture, such as the “Who knew?” rationale.
The real truth is they were a 5 win team that had luck. The harder truth is that they are not much better than that this year.
Well, we're waiting....
BTW, as far as excuses
Seattle was 4-12. St. Louis was 2-14. Seems you should be on their board telling them how they can’t do well this year based on last year. Barely winning is better than barely losing, though I notice you forgot to mention the blowout of STL at the Stick. Did you also acount that when playing in STL, the Niners were playing their fourth road game in five weeks? That’s five different cities in consecutive weeks at the end of the season. These guys get physically and mentally tired just like all athletes. Good teams find a way to win on their worst day.
So this is how they’ve improved over against a 2 win team.
Bad teams find a way to lose on a good day too. How’s that?
Well, we're waiting....
Bad teams find a way to lose on a good day too. How’s that?
that was us during the New England, Phili, New York, and Arizona games…. Those games could have been won without he who shall not be named… We can do better , we can do worse, that’s why I watch every Sunday.
If you mean..
Martz, well that’s on Nolan. If you mean JTO, that’s on the other QB’s who couldn’t beat him out. If it’s on all 3, then that’s the fault of the FO for not firing Nolan when they had the chance prior to all of that.
Well, we're waiting....
well...
noodle arm and broken arm really couldn’t win the job in a martz system… and yes wtf was out FO thinking hiring martz…
From what I read...
The York’s didn’t like Martz because they are close with Charly Armey.
Armey and Martz hated each other. Martz wasn’t even the catalyst for Warner. That was a Vermeil call. Armey found Warner, and Martz was reluctant on starting him after Green went down. The reason why Aremy and Martz hated each other was because Martz never liked Warner. This is all Ram crap that I read form Ram fans and the beat writers.
Nolan was mad because he got demoted. He was publicly humiliated, and you can see his defiance during the “trigger” Presser. So, he pulled the trigger and brought Martz, to the chagrin of the owners and ScotM. He knew he was going down. He knew he was going to be blamed. So he made a point in Smith, and used Martz to negate ScotM’s boy.
I know this sounds like crazy stuff, but that’s what makes sense due to reports. The 49ers apologized for Erickson and Donahue. They swept Nolan and Martz under the rug with Singletary.
Yet, the team still has Smith and Hill. The reason why Martz brought in JTO.
Well, we're waiting....
again...
Noodle arm and broken arm can’t cut it in a Martz system… I think the FO believes that Martz threw them both under the bus… Regardless they know that both of them aren’t the long term answer so we either have a QBOTF in Nate Davis or we’ll get a franchise QB next year as long as it’s not freakin Tebow…
Speaking of platitudes
“a five win team that had luck.” It’s like you’re describing yourself. The Niners of 2008 were a few things but lucky was not one of them. My goodness…
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Week 2.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions
"it also says the players responded to Sing and Hill for that matter."'
Oh dear…
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions
In fairness..
They do respond to Singletary. But they did with Nolan too in his first 2 years, before he blew up on Smith.
Well, we're waiting....
I don't question the players' motivation under Singletary,
but I do doubt the exaggerated effect it has on players’ performance.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
If you compare it to how they played under Nolan
It actually makes quite a difference… The players just didn’t seem like they wanted to win that badly after the Nolan/Smith debacle… It’s like they thought he cared more about his suits than the team itself… And as fans we saw the intensity go up a bit after Singletary took charge and had the whole “We Want Winners” speech.
Players don't play for their coaches.
They play for:
1. Money
2. Respect/Recognition
3. Pride
4. Genuine Love of the Game
5. Money
None of those things changed when Singletary took over as head coach midway through the 2008 season, so there’s really no basis to argue that they actually began to play “harder”.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
"Same schedule with only two exceptions of what the other NFC West clubs played."
Yeah, one exception being the 0-16 Detroit Lions, funny how you left that out.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions
And how many teams out of those listed divisions did the 49ers beat?
A horrible Bills team, an offensively challenged LOLSKINS, and a Jets team that wasn’t anywhere near as good as they were during the first half of the season?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions
And yet they won enough to not have a losing record
Jets would’ve won their division without losing to SF. Bills would’ve not had a losing record. No, everyone can’t play the Steelers and Ravens every week. Sometimes you just gotta beat who’s on the schedule. They did seven times, more than Seattle with the same opponents.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Since you brought up the Lions..
Here is where “You are as good as your record” does not apply:
2007: 7-9
2008: 0-16
There is kind of a big reason why they went 7-9 in 2007. Kind of a reason why the 49ers went 7-9 in 2008.
The point is, a lot of teams go the other way of “you are what you record is”. We’ve seen a lot of teams that weren’t as good as they’re record. MIA went 11-5 playing a favorable sched. They got blown out the first game of the playoffs. But at least they have stability and a vision from Parcells in the FO. If the 49ers go 7-9 this year with a tough sched using Singletary’s philosophy, that’s a good 7-9. With a few breaks and luck on the good side, 9-7. Bad breaks on the negative, 5-11. But if they’re consistent, then they can build upon that to break the 10 win barrier, and do it season after season.
If they had MIA sched last season this season, sure 11-5. But does that make them a true 11-5 team?
Well, we're waiting....
“If the 49ers go 7-9 this year with a tough sched using Singletary’s philosophy, that’s a good 7-9.” – OK, so we got you on record with this.
“With a few breaks and luck on the good side, 9-7. Bad breaks on the negative, 5-11.” So your window is 5-11 to 9-7. Mine is 6-10 to 11-5, basically a one game difference otherwise we’re seeing an similar end result. We’ve established that I have a more optimistic view of the team than you but you seem to hate that, or hate that perhaps your pessimism will be wrong. I don’t know.
“if they’re consistent, then they can build upon that…” – I agree here too. When I say 10-6 I never say SB champs. This is Sing’s first season in building this team toward where it needs to be. I t doesn’t mean they can’t make the playoffs early in that journey. We’re still talking about the current NFC.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Oh wow, there's one
So Niners beating Detroit is your big hole in the schedule? Rams lost to Chicago. Seahawks lost to Green Bay. Cards lost to Minnesota. Had the Niners played any of the other NFC North three and instead lost they’d be 6-10, assuming they didn’t in turn win one of their other losses. Yet they’d still better than Rams or Seahawks and equal to them combined. Please tell me you can do better than this?
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
"I also believe the Niners have superior talent to St. Louis and are a bit better than Seattle."
You can’t possibly be serious.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Said it
Thus serious. I’m more shocked that you could seriously disagree with the former. As for the latter, it’s close enough that I can understand disagreeing.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
The latter isn't even close.
You could make a reasonable argument that Seattle is more talented at almost every single starting position. The Rams have a better offensive line, a once-great QB, and one of the few RBs better than Frank Gore. Their defense has some gems on defense, and Steve Spagnuolo’s reputation calling defensive plays speaks for itself. I’ll give the 49ers the benefit of the doubt here, but it certainly isn’t a set-in-stone fact like you make it seem to be.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 10:10 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't think the Rams have a better O-Line at all.
And I don’t think too highly of ours.
My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists.
The Rams are in full rebuild mode..
They cut a lot of high draft picks like Klop already. Spags ain’t screwing around there.
Well, we're waiting....
I like Joe Staley,
but I think Jason Smith has a higher ceiling. Jason Brown is one of the best centers in the league, he handled Haynesworth. Alex Barron, if underwhelming for his draft position, is solid. Richie Incognito is a dumbass but has bite. Jacob Bell was a noteworthy starter on Tennessee’s vaunted o-line, last year seems like an aberration compared to his overall career.
It’s not that they’re in the running for best line in the NFC but aside from Staley and Heitmann, SF’s line doesn’t really have any established people.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions
You're showing your full blown bias on this one
The rams have some gems on defense and you think their starters are better than the Niners? I’m afraid I’m done with you. Get real.
You gotta bring ass to get ass.
Alright.
But let me ask you one thing, would you rather have Donnie Avery or Josh Morgan? Marc Bulger or Shaun Hill? Stephen Jackson or Frank Gore? There are others that are debatable too so I don’t see why you’d say SF’s starter’s are easily better.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 3, 2009 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions
i did mention the pass rush has to come along…
but yes i’m just hoping we have not seen all the blitz packages because it is preseason.
by whitemike1644 on Sep 2, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions
also i do know they are run first but i just don’t see their backfield having the skills we have.
by whitemike1644 on Sep 2, 2009 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions
I believe he mean offensive...
But White is a pretty darn good RB with a good line… and Collins stepped up when he had to last year… We can try all we want to be like the Titans or the Ravens but we don’t have that domintating defense just yet…. god we need a pass rush….
Collins is a expereinced Vet..
That has played in big games. Fisher is on his way to being a HOF HC.
TEN has had the luxury of having Fisher for years. That means a lot.
Well, we're waiting....
yeah that's what I was saying
In games where teams exclusively tried to shut down the run Collins preformed.. And yeah Fisher has been there for a WHILE… just like Cower for the Steelers… We don’t have the luxuries of many of the teams we are trying to emulate…
And Collins still has a cannon arm.
Thus being very effective in a run-first team who needs to take shots deep once ina while.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Sep 2, 2009 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm against Fisher HOF push
He bottled up McNair until Eddie George fell apart. Considering how good McNair was when given the chance I think Fisher cost the Titans at least one Super Bowl.
all valid points i’m just going off the turn around one team did, and i still think the titans are comparable to what we can get done. also we could use the dolphins as an example but lets be honest ronnie brown is nothing similar to frank gore. and i think they just caught everyone by surprise. this year will tell.
so yea thats just my opinion though.. go niners! can’t wait to see nate davis on friday… i live in san diego so i might just make it out to the game
ive been looking found some on the visitor side 50 yard line field level… good price too… charger fans are pretty crappy though thats the only thing i’m not looking forward to.
i would love to see nate davis play in person though and i want to see coffee also.
ahhhh i gotta email this guy back ;-)
by whitemike1644 on Sep 3, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
