As a football analyst and constant 'noise-maker', he's one of many people who can be places in the 'Skip Bayless' category as a Fox News worthy sports contributor. Without discrediting any of the folks over at Fox News, understand that the analogy is simply stating that this guy loves to wage his bets on "what is" rather than "what could be".
His constant admonishment of Alex Smith is annoying. Alex Smith may be averaging 189 yds per game passing and be the scapegoat to a lot of arguements against the potential of this team but he is not (this year) the reason for our 9-2 "failures" thus far.
I firmly believe in the 'game-plan', 'managing' wins as appropriate but to base the success or failure of a team solely on a QB being able to put a 250+ yd, 3 TD, 1 INT over the course of three games in the playoffs is ridiculous. I might be echoing words that you all may or may NOT be thinking but I love the idea that ANY NFL team can win on any given Sunday.
We've seen the 49ers come out and roll on their opponents just as well as we've seen them 'manage' their opponents into a victory. I did not look at this past week against the Baltimore Ravens as a game that would be a walk. The competitive disadvantages aside, the Baltimore Ravens are a fantastic football team that deserve as much respect as they were warranted prior to this game taking place. I've said that for several games up until this point but that's not what my gripe is about.
The notion that the 49ers and more specifically, Alex Smith can only win if "X" numbers are met under "X" circumstances is what bothers me. Each opponent carries different responsibilities and different keys to success than the one previous. Each opponent will gameplan their success based on what the 49ers have already accomplished and look to exploit those areas of recognized weakness... it goes with-out saying, no?
However, I would never levy any bets against 53 men whose only purpose in their profession is to take the advice of their leadership and execute a strategy that is as interchanging as the tides on the west coast. Counting a team out based on some arbitrary number that a QB has yet to meet on a routine basis is a weak stance to take against any player, at any time.
Alex Smith may or may not be our 'long term' answer at QB but there are 52 other guys on that team that would have something to say about the success or failure of this team.
Personally, I'm not an Alex Smith is-our-future guy, but at this juncture, I'll take a 'game-manager' who has 9 wins and respect from the lockeroom than someone who doesn't and I'm almost positive that Jamie Dukes has little to no influence on the 99%.