Jeff Pearlman Is an Idiot; I Mean, My Objective Review of his Esquire Article
As the 49ers have become more and more successful this year, I have noticed a greater tendency in myself to seek out national sports news outlets. I would say that most of the time, I am reading your Maioccos and your Barrows. Sometimes, however, I am drawn like the proverbial fly to the Venus Flytrap toward more national reporting.
Frankly, I'm curious. I want to know what other people are, you know, saying about stuff and stuff. Usually, that's about all I see. People say stuff about stuff because of reasons and stuff. Oh yeah, there are a lot of things: because of reasons and stuff these things about the 49ers are thingy-things.
If you want informed sports writing, CSN Bay Area is where it's at. Or the Sac Bee. Or, better yet, stop by the one-stop website for everything 49ers at NinersNation.com! where you get smart analysis with darn good looking writers.
Occasionally, when perusing the national news outlets, I find something insightful and in some ways I like it more. At the very least, Skip Bayless' neck skin makes me giggle (please don't ask why - it disturbs me to think about it). What I find most fun of all, however, is when I find a fool saying foolish things. Let me tell you: Jeff Pearlman in his recent article "The Real Tim Tebow" for Esquire says a lot of foolish things.
Follow me after the jump, if you would be so kind.
Now I want to be explicit in three ways before I start this review:
1) I don't know Jeff Pearlman. I've never met him. I don't necessarily care to, but whatever. As such, I can't actually claim to know if he is an idiot or not (as I essentially do in the title of this article). I think he has written a lot of idiotic things in his career (not the least of which is his unofficial official biography about Barry Hilter, I mean Bonds - reading the book, one wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two). But just because I am about to attack his idiotic statements does not mean I am interested in actually attacking him as a person. I shouldn't have to write this disclaimer, but hey, internet.
2) Tim Tebow is a religious dude. I am too. Millions of people are. We all express this in different ways. This should be all I have to say, but again, I kind of like Tebow for his upfront honesty with his faith, and yet I can also see how this could be super-duper annoying. What is most important, and what we can all agree on, is that Tim Tebow is not a good Quarterback. My statement has nothing to do with him personally.
And 3), and perhaps most importantly, I am about to say some nice things about Alex Smith. I just want to be clear: Alex Smith is a slight above average NFL QB. I don't know if he is going to be the 49ers' long term QB. Personally, I don't think he should, but if he keeps playing the way he has been, I wouldn't lose sleep over it. Now let us commence!
Pearlman, in "The Real Tim Tebow," essentially argues that Tim Tebow's recent appeal is based in the fact that we perceive the Bronco QB as an average dude doing above-average things. As Pearlman writes, this is "wickedly appealing to your average fan, in the if-this-shit-bag-can-do-it-maybe-I-can-too sort of way."
First off, I would like to say that Pearlman calling Tebow a [site decorum]-bag without really qualifying it except to, you know, just assume that this is what everybody and their mother thinks is pretty foolish.
I would argue that people watch the NFL because they want to see transcendent people with transcendent athletic gifts do transcendent things. College and High School ball holds more of what Pearlman considers Tebowmania. True, athletes in college are way more athletic than us average joes, but the games has more of an organic and less professional appeal. The NFL is different.
But Tebowmania is misplaced, Pearlman asserts, because he "actually belongs in the NFL" since "he's big, he's fast, [and] he's athletic." Pearlman illustrates this with football stats and height and weight measurements and 40 times and ... oh wait, he illustrates his point by imagining Tim Tebow arm wrestling some dude, and because Tebow wins this arm wrestling match in Pearlman's fantasy land, he deserves to be in the NFL. Science.
Rather, it is Alex Smith who is just super average and deserves our attention, says Pearlman, because he is, well, super average.
Ugh... just ugh. And bleh too. Hecka bleh. Like, hecka stupid ugh-bleh.
If Pearlman were to cite Tebow's numbers like his horrid accuracy rate and then how many games he has won in making the claim that he is an average (or below-average player, as I think) who is doing extraordinary things, then I might listen. I wouldn't buy it because I think this whole Tebowmania thing is more of a media generated controversy than anything. Nobody I talk to who is a football fan cares about Tebow like the media does. People who aren't football fans but are more of religion fans seem to care to a greater extent.
But no, instead Pearlman conjures up some sort of subjective measuring stick for evaluating Alex Smith and Tim Tebow in conjunction. The measuring stick? Basically how buff they look on television. Pearlman perceives Tebow as athletic and thus Timmy-boy deserves to be in the pros; Alex, on the other hand, is just a "crap player" who "hasn't fully embarrassed himself." Or, as Pearlman asserts "that Alex Smith kid really can't throw or run, but the Niners sure have found ways around it!"
This year, a look at Alex's numbers does not reveal a "crap player." They reveal an average to slightly above NFL QB who is playing well within his system. Moreover, if he would even bother to watch the games, Pearlman would realize that Alex can run really well and he can make way more throws than Tebow. Really the only throw he can't make, to my great consternation, is the sideline throw. It's an important throw, but he is way more accurate than in years past and leaps and bounds more accurate than Tim Tebow.
But what bugged me the most about Pearlman's evaluation of Alex is that he is attacking the system in which Smith operates too, not just the player. Alex just throws a "series of dinks [and] dunks." Pearlman reaches the conclusion that "When Coach Jim Harbaugh tells Smith to roll out and throw a three-yard screen to Gore, he does so. When Harbaugh tells Smith to hit Crabtree five yards out on a slant, he does so, too. The whole thing is uncomplicated and precisely scripted, the updated version of NFL Quarterbacking for Dummies."
These few sentences should just piss off anybody who knows anything about the West Coast offense. What system uses running backs not just in pass protection but also as pass receivers? The WCO. What system highly values the slant route? The WCO. What system first had, quite literally, scripted plays to start a game? Say it with me now, the WCO. This is the system that Joe ran, that Steve ran, and that changed the landscape of the NFL. Since when did a strong, short passing game become something only "crap" QBs run?
Sure, can Aaron Rodgers make every throw, long and short? Yeah, and he would play better in Harbaugh's system than Alex does. Would the system make him any less of a player? Not at all.
Oh yeah, and have you seen Alex's biceps? They are insane. Pearlman got this all wrong.
557 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I have stumbled on that trash piece some time ago.
But what do you expect from an idiot?
And, by the way, yes, Alex Smith is an average NFL quarterback. But he is an above average in his athleticism, which is also so frigging far removed from am average man that he as well be from another species from a far away planet. Dude is made of bronze and runs with the best of them. Heck, I think he could play hockey in the NHL.
;)
And you just have to love how he disrespects Jaworski's opinion.
Because a writer/journalist knows more about quarterbacking than a guy who played the position for 16 years, right? Riiiiiiggghhhhttt. Idiot.
I really enjoyed this article.
In some ways, this is what blogs should be about: holding big media to account, looking out for our team, admonishing perceived poor/lazy work in the wider media, doing some excellent work which corrects mistruths or truisms that are left hanging out there by larger/wider organizations.
And it’s well put together and funny. Great stuff, as always, Wessington.
by LondonNiner on Dec 30, 2011 12:58 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Shameless plug you!!
Or, better yet, stop by the one-stop website for everything 49ers at NinersNation.com! where you get smart analysis with darn good looking writers.
Niners,Nets,Reds & USC!!!
The Most Interesting Man In The World---->Mikhail Prokhorov!!!
I swear....
I had NOTHING to do with that line!
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 1:07 PM PST up reply actions
lol it's funny though
Niners,Nets,Reds & USC!!!
The Most Interesting Man In The World---->Mikhail Prokhorov!!!
by Kidd2Petrovic on Dec 30, 2011 1:09 PM PST up reply actions
i dont know about the good looking part
but he sure is right about the rest.
Coach Harbaugh is the truth!!
by chris z on Dec 30, 2011 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Hear! Hear!
Have a rec
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 8:55 PM PST up reply actions
The goggles do nothing!
That article was so stupid it put my eyes out.
by Bigmouth on Dec 30, 2011 1:08 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Alex has a 90.1 NFL passer rating through 15 games.
He has a chance to finish with a better single-season mark than Joe Montana posted with the team in 1981, 1982, 1986, 1988 or 1990, courtesy Mike Sando.
The rating is impressive...
…but I think that’s more an argument for why passer rating is not a very reliable or illuminating stat, at least over single seasons.
Why would you call the QB rating not "reliable or illuminating"?
If I consider the state of the Niners offense this season, with its undermanned and constantly changing receiver corps, its O line that took over half the season to settle down, and a running game that was stuck in neutral for half the season, I’d say that Smith’s achievements as a QB in leading the Niners to 12 wins is as good as any by a Niners QB during regular season that I’ve seen since 1987 when I started following the Niners.
Did I mention that Smith’s achievements come with a new coach and a new offensive system with off-season lockout?
"leading"
One problem is determining what is responsible for a given win. Alex Smith has been a pivotal part of some games, less so in other games.
As for QB rating, it does not consider sacks at all in its rating and that has a pretty important bearing on offensive performance.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 1:43 PM PST up reply actions
The fact that Alex is far above average in avoiding sacks should add to his appreciation
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 2:38 PM PST up reply actions
2/3rds of them come in less than 3 seconds which puts minimal blame on the QB
with half of them coming in under 2.5 – which puts them wholely on the offensive line.
If Alex weren’t great at getting the ball out quickly or getting out of the pocket and throwing it away we’d be a lot closer to 60 sacks.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
making these kind of assertions—
that certain QBs are “better” or “good” at avoiding sacks or being sacked—requires meticulous film study to see what he has down field etc…
some QBs have have ways of avoiding... or taking sacks
Peyton Manning is great with his sense of timing and sensing the pass rush. He has a great knack of getting the ball off or getting rid of the ball right in time to avoid the sack.
Rob Johnson of Buffalo Bills fame had a horrible dropback-to-sack ratio… watching him you could see he just hung onto the ball too long, trying to make something happen when it wasn’t there.
Watching Smith you can see, while he may not have Manning’s skill of ridding himself of the ball, he doesn’t really hang on too long. Most of the sack can be put at the foot of the O-line giving no protection at times, allowing Smith with no time to make a play.
Since you don't know what you're talking about let me inform you
2009 Shaun Hill was sacked 18 times in 5 1/2 games
2009 Alex Smith (Without Joe Staley who got injured) 10 1/2 games sacked 22 times
2010 Shaun Hill – Lions started 10 games played in 11, sacked 17 times.
2010 Alex, still playing with our crap O-line, played 11 games started 10. He was sacked 25 times
Maybe it has to do with our line being horrible and Alex making up for their short-comings. Alex maintained about the same sack rate over those 2 years. Shaun Hill who is obviously horrible at avoiding sacks drastically improved as soon as he left the Niners.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:00 PM PST up reply actions
doesn't
Your comment was not specific and he easily could have misunderstood it as I did. So it’s not necessarily not knowing what he’s talking about, so much as not knowing what YOU are talking about.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:03 PM PST up reply actions
fair nuff.
But I doubt that’s what it was. He’s looking at the numbers and not accounting for O-line play at all.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
I've posted them dozens of times.
People see what they like to see. And people like to just look at the numbers without any context or comparison.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
Perhaps you have, but just assume that I’m a guy who just started reading the site recently and hasn’t seen any of those other posts. Because you’d be right in that assumption.
apologies then
I’m used to people cherry picking facts and stats that fit their viewpoint so I can be abrasive.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:53 PM PST up reply actions
In any case
These numbers certainly do show that Smith was probably better than Shaun Hill at avoiding sacks, and also probably not as a bad as his total sack numbers would indicate.
At the same time, I find it a bit hard to believe that a QB who leads the league in being sacked has truly been “above average” at avoiding them.
Hill wasn't the most mobile of QB's.
Smith, before this season, really had some pretty bad pocket presence. This year, it appears as though he really feels and slides.. he is playing more natural opposed to over thinking and worrying about making the mistakes. This is how he has become a more efficient QB this year. That, and his mechanics look quite a bit better; although he still from time to time will toss one off the back foot which caused the high passes we saw early on in the season… but lately he has seemed much more on target.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Things change
Like: the composition of the offensive line;
composition of the receiving corps;
a player’s time in position, necessary to acclimate to the speed of the game, irrespective of position played;
intelligence, individually, and collectively, of the players, and/or, coaching staff;
confidence, individually, collectively, and institutionally, in a given player’s ability to perform;
roster composition; and,
trust, without a doubt, your teammate will fulfill their assigned responsibility.
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 9:36 PM PST up reply actions
avoiding sacks?
He does a good job scrambling at times, but seems more likely to take a sack than try and throw it away sometimes.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 2:50 PM PST up reply actions
I think sacks allowed
doesn’t necessarily mean that Smith is bad at avoiding sacks, because he may have to escape more often than most other QBs, so it’s a ratio of sacks taken to “opportunities” to get sacked, which of course aint a stat.. And it’s hard to throw the ball away when you are in the pocket and can’t get out. Taking the sack is worse than an Intentional grounding or an interception.
in the pocket
I might try and take a look back at all his sacks this season because I recall a fair amount where he rolled out of the pocket and instead of throwing it up past the line of scrimmage and out of bounds he took a big sack. I need to “check the film” on that.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
I don't remember many plays
like that this year. And I meant “a sack ISN’T worse than an IG or Pick”
Salary_cap as the voice of reason?
I feel like singing Ol lang syne
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
Dan Fogelberg's version?
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 10:08 PM PST up reply actions
There was the crushing sandwich sack he took early in the year.
For the most part when he’s gotten out of the pocket he’s avoided sacks. When he’s gotten trapped inside a pocket that’s a yard wide and a yard deep he’s gotten sacked.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:05 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Smith has hard time keeping his head up
and continuing to make reads when the pocket collapses it seems to me.
This is fair. I think almost all QBs are like that with the notable exception of Brees and Rapistburger
Brees because he’s a geniune badass and Rapistburger because he’s as big as the DE’s trying to hit him.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:36 PM PST up reply actions
Really it was only that ONE big play
where he did just that. It was just so egregious, and such a miracle he didn’t fumble, that it sticks out.
Ougadas on Vernon Davis and the anemic 49ers offense:
" Our best weapon (is) a 6’3" 250 pound ballerina with cinderblock hands..."
Because it's not
QB rating is notoriously volatile and thus unreliable over anything less than several seasons. It’s also a Frankenstein stat that doesn’t fully or accurately capture a QB’s contributions to the team.
Sando’s basically cherry picking one good season by Smith, comparing it with several great seasons by Montana, and pretending the comparison has meaning. It doesn’t, not when there are other metrics that tell us Joe’s seasons were significantly better, passer rating notwithstanding.
I’m not saying Smith hasn’t been good — the Esquire article was trash — but Sando’s comparison is very misleading. And if you can’t see the difference between our passing offense this year and during our glory years under Joe and Steve, well… we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Yes leading a passing attack behind a quality offensive line
With Jerry Rice, Dwight Clark/Brent Jones, Roger Craig, Tom Rathman and John Taylor is a whole hell of a lot easier.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 2:39 PM PST up reply actions
Do you honestly believe...
…in your heart of hearts, that Alex Smith would have done the things Joe and Steve did if he played for those Niner teams? I honestly don’t.
To clarify...
…by “our passing offense this year” I’m referring to Smith specifically. I understand he’s not surrounded by the same talent as Joe or Steve. But even taking this into account, there is an OBVIOUS difference between his play and theirs, to my eyes at least.
It’s not a good comparison because you’re comparing across different eras.
When Joe Montana posted an 88.4 passer rating in 1981, that was good for 4th in the NFL. The league leader was Ken Anderson at 98.4.
In 2011, Alex Smith’s 90.1 is good for 10th. Meanwhile, Aaron Rodgers leads the universe at a whopping 122.5.
It’s easier to post high passer ratings now than at any other time in NFL history. Smith is not doing nearly as well, relative to the league, as Montana did in his time.
If Alex had an offensive line and hadn't had 2 long bomb TDs dropped by VD
a couple other bombs dropped by Crabs, A TD to Crabs taken away by a penalty that didn’t happen, a BOMB to Ginn for a TD taken away by a penalty that didn’t happen… His rating goes up significantly. Alex has had every break go against him so far as great catches/drops and officiating go and his line stinks. He’s played damn well to have a 90.1 and have as many things go against him as he has.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Alex Smith has played well
Simply comparing his passer rating in 2011 to Joe Montana’s in 1981 isn’t a good comparison. Passer ratings as a whole were lower then, because teams ran more and defenses could get away with more pass interference and hitting the QB.
Also, it’s not like Rodgers, Brees, Brady, and the other elite QBs don’t have receivers who drop balls sometimes. They’re just better, so their other throws make up for it, that’s all.
Defenses can still get away with hitting Alex Smith.
Guy gets his facemasked yanked, gets helmet to helmet shots WHILE SLIDING, gets driven into the ground and never gets a flag.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I’ll try to respond to some of the comments on my comment .
Any metric that isolates a single individual’s accomplishments in a quintessentially team game such as football is suspect in my eyes.
What has intrigued me is how easily many fans have resorted to using metrics that reduce/belittle Smiths performances. But when those same metrics are given less importance when they show Smith in a positive light. (I don’t use the word “statistics” because the sample sizes in almost all these numbers are two small to be statistically significant).
Take for example, the number of sacks. Very good QBs like Big Ben (and even Rodgers in earlier years) hold on to the ball longer and would rather take a sack rather than throw an interception. If it’s good for Big Ben, it’s good for Alex.
by Mood_Indigo on Dec 30, 2011 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs
some sacks are unavoidable
in other words, it’s worse to throw an “intentional grounding.” or a pick. Observation and film study is really the key to deciphering how good/savvy these QB’s are at avoiding pressure/sacks and making positive plays out of them, or at least not hurting their team with negative plays, e.g., int’s and sacks.
Intentional grounding
equals a sack, minus the chance for a fumble. Though something bad in the process of throwing it away is a possibility.
Also, there are some tremendous problems with any Montana-Smith comparison
Smith was drafted by an essentially expansion team with a defensive-minded coach. How would Smith have fared if drafted by an Offensive Genius installing a new offensive concept for which defenses had no answer, and who had drafted a stable of talent like the 1981 draft?
by Mood_Indigo on Dec 30, 2011 2:57 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Context?? Context!!
I don’t got to show you no context!!
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 10:18 PM PST up reply actions
An offensive genius...
…like Mike McMcarthy? Norv Turner? Mike Martz? Okay, maybe not Martz, but Smith has played for some of the most gifted offensive minds in football.
I’m not saying the turnover in coaching and poor talent didn’t hurt his development. But coaching and talent aren’t destiny. I’m sure, if we looked through pro football history, we’d find QBs who have succeeded despite such obstacles.
PS
I’ve been equally critical of people who abuse stats to draw misleading comparisons the other way. For example, some commentators love to compare Smith to Trent Dilfer, which is just idiotic. Dilfer was one of the worst QBs in football the year the Ravens won the Super Bowl. Takes just a few seconds on Pro Football Reference to see the comparison is totally bogus.
What intrigues me...
…is how some commentators who aren’t satisfied with Smith’s merely being good, keep abusing statistics to make him seem even better than he is. I see that a heck of a lot more often than what you describe.
This isn’t about picking stats to reduce/belittle Smith’s performances. It’s about being honest and accurate. The people like Sando who cite garbage stats like passer rating to draw misleading comparisons between Smith and Montana are doing a disservice, particularly to casual fans who aren’t stats savvy enough to see through the BS storm.
I’m sorry if it seems like we’re always on Alex’s case. We all want to see him succeed. But just about every advanced statistical analysis agrees he’s been average or slightly above. So, when guys like Sando use statistics like a drunk uses lamp posts to compare him to Montana, you better believe we’re going to call him on it.
Honestly, would you prefer we didn’t? That we simply allowed inaccurate and misleading claims about statistics to slide? How would that improve the discussion?
by Bigmouth on Dec 31, 2011 8:53 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
when
a stat makes Montana and Alex Smith looks comparable, it should tell you the stat is uninformative.
by salary_cap on Dec 30, 2011 1:57 PM PST up reply actions 5 recs
For once
I wholeheartedly agree with you.
Rec.
"Football combines the two worst things about America: It is violence punctuated by committee meetings" -George Will
by lottwasgangsta on Dec 30, 2011 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
QB rating is about efficiency.
That, Smith is. To fully balance it out, add in yards and touchdowns.
The dirty little secret about Montana is that he wasn’t Marino. He never put up big numbers. He was efficient. And he won Super Bowls. Marino put up big numbers, but never got it done like Montana did.
The same could be said about Brady. He didn’t really become Big Arm Brady till 07. He had some good numbers 01-04, but nothing like the past few years.
Smith has been efficient this year. And with a Big D like ours, that is key. We can cite the 9ers red zone offense as a problem, but it is a testament to the offense and Smith that we are getting into the red zone so much, and key that they aren’t turning it over in the red zone.
If Smith wins the Super Bowl this year (which is very possible), and Smith makes a few big plays to clinch the win, the whole Smith and Montana comparison could take an interesting (but VERY welcome!) twist.
by musamonster on Dec 30, 2011 7:39 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
you could argue Marino was better
I in fact think he was. If marino was a INT machine, which I don’t remember him being, then sure. But the “player A has more championships than player B, therefore player A is better” in a team sport is backwards.
Smith has been efficient in the sense that he’s got only 5 picks, but considering the throws he’s asked to make (or not make), throwing much more than 5 picks would be terrible. The defense has allowed Harbaugh to make Smith the most protected QB in the league.
One superbowl run, especially depending on how big an impact Smith plays in it, ain’t gonna make the Montana comparisons any more reasonable.
Of course you think Marino was better
Joe Montana was a San Francisco 49er.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 30, 2011 7:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I think Steve Young
was better than Montana and a top 5 QB of all time. But he was a Buccaneer too. Damn it…
Oh it isn't crazy to think that, lots of people do.
Or that Marino was better than Montana. One could make an argument for both of those and I’ve seen people make those arguments.
However when you make that argument I don’t take it seriously because you seem to have a negative bias against anything 49ers. It is very strange.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
Steve Young had the same personnel as Montana for a long period of time.
And in some cases, a better team if you include the earlier SB year runs for Montana… So what was the problem for Steve? Why didn’t he get 3 Superbowls?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Yes
both Young and Montana had uber talented teams. Why Young didn’t win 4? Probably lots of reasons. But using team accomplishments to boast individuals is just not fair or logical. Montana is good because he was good, regardless of whether his teams fell short in the SB 4 times. Sad part is if Young doesn’t win that superbowl, which was not all him — it was one of the most talented teams on both sides of the ball I’ve seen in a while — people would still doubt his greatness.
Are you hating on a 49er right now?
Nope...
You said Young was better… I was pointing out that he wasn’t. I loved every second of Steve Young playing for the Niners. Why? Because I support my frikin’ team!
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Chicken, or egg?
Teams rise, and fall.
Which team set the record for consecutive seasons of 10 wins?
Please notice: the question is “which team”?
Not “which quarterback”, because that is subject to change.
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 10:38 PM PST up reply actions
So Young didn't play with the same guys Montana did?
In the ’90’s, when Young took the team, by most standards had a better supporting cast (“team”) than Montana did early on for sure, and then after probably too.
How many clutch plays did Young have compared to Montana? And how many games did Young sorta blow come crunch time? How many did Montana blow?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Context
The short answer to your subject line is: no.
The underlining premise to your subject line is that the NFL is static, and unchanging. I don’t think you would care to argue that.
Every team changed, each, and every, year. While the 49ers were riding their skein of 10 wins, opponents were reaping the benefit of better drafting positions, especially divisional rivals. Despite the handicap their seasonal success assigned the team in drafting position, institutional factors aided the team in maintaining their dominance through a record-setting number of years, irrespective of the number on the jersey of the signal-caller under center, the center, guard, tackle, tight end, wide receiver, defensive tackle, defensive end, line-backer, cornerback, safety, long-snapper, punter, place-kicker, and/or gunner.
To me, that is definitive proof the game is a TEAM sport..
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 11:15 PM PST up reply actions
Fine... don't disagree with "Team Sport". Clearly it is to even the average fan.
Goes without saying…
Point remains the same… Young, for the duration of his career, was surrounded by more talent than Montana was for the duration of his career. In other words, he had more opportunity at his disposal.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Examples?
Both 1992 and 1993 Championship games, ‘95 and ’96 Divisional games, 1997 Championship game, 1998 Divisional game…. Young’s numbers were not exactly excellent in any of those losses. Maybe he didn’t lose the game all by himself in those situations, but he really didn’t do everything he could to lead the TEAM to a victory in those games.
And don’t get me wrong, I loved watching Steve Young play…. it’s just that Montana did a lot more with his OPPORTUNITIES…
Opportunity is key in the NFL. It’s what you do with those. And yeah, there is context and all that, but you cannot legitimately argue that Montana was just that much more lucky, or something like that.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Way behind you!
My son types at 80 wpm; I’m not close to that.
I think you’re helping me make my point regarding the necessity of collaboration for success in this sport:
how many years have you listed, in succession, in which the team qualified for post-season play?
How often did the 49ers meet the same opponent, in succession, in the post-season? Didn’t the victor in that contest have a greater degree of roster continuity?
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 31, 2011 12:00 AM PST up reply actions
Montana faced the same
if not more adversity than Young EVER had to… I make my point but certainly not yours. Young had that many more opportunities to make it to the big one, yet he only made one on an all-star packed team.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Agree, to disagree
Every year is it’s own. Name on the jersey applied to a person altered by the passage of time; the synergy of a team had to reflect that reality.
Teams changed—rivals rose, then fell, replaced by newer versions, perhaps featuring schemes that had to be met, and overcome.
The dynamic of change cannot be discounted; whether any specific 49er team was a superior compilation of talent, vis-a-vis another, is beyond my ken. Cheering this team through 6 decades has given me an appreciation for an aggregation of men able to meld their talents together to achieve a collective goal, over one that is an assemblage of great individual talent (see any team from the 50’s).
Bring me home, Dusty Rhodes
by jestasmaltownboy on Dec 30, 2011 11:45 PM PST up reply actions
But, but he was better than Montana
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Early 80's the Cowboys were the team to beat.
That’s why such a big deal was made of “The Catch”.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Technically
Young does have 3 SB rings
The Dude: Oh boy. How ya gonna keep 'em down on the farm once they've seen Karl Hungus.
Marino didn't exactly play with a bunch of scrubs...
He had a really good offensive supporting cast, and their defense wasn’t too shabby either. Montana beat Marino on the biggest stage with “efficiency”. Anyone who claims Marino is better definitely has some loose marbles.
Re: Smith has been the most efficient player outside of Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees this year. And you are assuming that he could not have done what they have done statistically in the same situations… it’s an assumption based on past performances which in and of itself is a negative bias. There’s nothing objective about your comment here.
And if Smith makes some clutch throws in the playoffs, as he has done in some games this year, comparisons will fly regardless of if they are warranted or not.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Look at the degree of difficulty
between Rodgers/Brees and Smith!!!!!!!! At least admit that you are a homer or have man love for Smith cause arguing that they are having similar seasons or are similar quality players because of “efficiency” is bogus. What credibility do you have assessing QB’s errrrrr 49er QB’s?
What credibility do you have on this board with assessing ANY position?
Zilch.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
compared to Montana
he did, but point taken. Was Jim Kelly better than Marino cause he got to 4 super bowls?
It’s more than reasonble to make the case Marino was the best QB ever, let alone better than Montana. It can also be argued that Montana is better, but to say it is beyond rational is itself irrational.
Compared to Montana he did?
Okay, you obviously know nothing about that era… Mark Duper, Mark Clayton, Dan Johnson, 3 very capable running backs… a superb offensive line… An elite defense… that lead to a record of 14-2 in the regular season and marched right through the playoffs.
Scrubs compared to Montana? At least do some homework before you start making naive comments like that since you probably weren’t even alive yet during that time.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Elite Defense?
The Dolphins defense in 1984 was 19th in total yards allowed. I’ll give you that they were 7th in scoring D, but that’s still not really elite.
Did you look at the simple rating system?
And it’s more than raw stats…. they had some very, very good players on their Dline and in the secondary…. their linebackers were not so great…. but yards are not the ultimate stat. They were ranked 7th in allowed points… that is probably a more significant stat. 7th is pretty close to elite.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Yes, I noted the scoring D. I wouldn’t say 7th best is truly elite. I just don’t think you can really justify that Dolphins D as being truly “elite” — they were pretty good, but not elite.
I think their defense was very underrated.
For perspective… (different era’s and all that) but the Titans defense is ranked 7th this year.. they are not considered “elite”… but they have been at the very least on the cusp all year.
The ’84 Dolphins did not get to the Superbowl solely on offense like a couple of teams this year will do in the playoffs.
What defenses would you consider “elite” this year?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And ironically enough, the '11 Dolphins are right there tied for 7th.
I would say that they were on the cusp of “elite” was well. And if they land the right coach, that defense will be elite next year. Same goes for the Titans… they get a couple of pieces and they will be right there too.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Okay, so maybe they were on the "cusp" of elite
But underrated is not the same as elite. By the way, I looked at their SRS defensive rating in 1984 on Pro Football Reference, and it puts them about in the middle of the pack defensively at 1.5 (by contrast, their offensive SRS was 9.1, tops in the NFL). They were a decent defense, but to call them elite is hyperbole.
So maybe I was missing the word "cusp".
But they weren’t by any means just an “average” defense.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Can't hurt when your defensive coordinator's name was:
Chuck Studley
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
"Anyone who claims Marino is better definitely has some loose marbles."
It’s an argument a lot of people like to make. I personally am a Montana guy in that debate, but to say anybody claiming otherwise has loose marbles is not really a fair point to a reasonable discussion.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:07 PM PST up reply actions
Fine.
I stand by my statement… There’s no argument.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
but there is an argument for Marino
as David just pointed out. There is just no right answer. As David said, there is just no conversing/debating with you because you do not leave “a fair point for reasonable discussion” or concede anything.
Yeah, there is a solid and factual based debate on why Marino is not, and never was as good as Montana.
But you talk crap about every single player in the history of the franchise, yet, we’re supposed to view you as a fan of this team?
And you are allowed to stay on this site?
Like…. for what Fooch?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Too bad you can’t see him for what he is.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Riiiiggghhht… because I am on here 3-4 times a week trolling and talking trash about the 49ers, eh?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And how is that? By backing your team?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Weird philosophy or way of looking at it but okay
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
by making things seem black and white...
and refusing to accept any possible alternatives over and over, when in fact there is room for healthy debate.
People can provide specific facts as evidence to support their opinion, but at the end of the day debating Montana vs. Marino or Montana vs. Young or whatever is all opinion. There is always an argument.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:24 PM PST up reply actions
Not when it comes to facts.
And things are black and white. You could say, it’s my opinion that human beings can fly… is that realistic? Nope. Are you entitled to that opinion, I suppose so.
But I don’t see how that response addresses my question. That’s trolling? Providing facts? And telling people they are nuts for thinking something other than what the black and white supports? Or getting sick and tired of people that claim to be fans but NEVER offer up any reasoning to support that they are indeed “fans”? And calling them out for that makes you some sort of reverse troll? That’s bogus… total bogus.
Sorry, that’s not trolling.. that’s telling it how it is.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I think both of you
provide value to the community, but I also think both of you act like trolls at times.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:36 PM PST up reply actions
That's BS...
But I guess that’s YOUR opinion.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
facts, opinions
If you say, which of Montana and Marino was a better postseason QB, you can’t dispute Montana over Marino. If you see who was a better overall statistical QB, Marino gets an edge with his monster numbers, but you could make some arguments for Joe. But when you just say, who was a better QB, it is not black and white because there is no specific context to the discussion.
You claim that certain issues are black and white but the context of the question is framed by an overly broad question. And then, one someone question it, they have a few marbles loose. It is trollish to levy personal attacks at a person when you are not providing nearly enough context for the discussion and that suddenly makes it their fault.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:35 PM PST up reply actions
A specific question wasn't posed.
It was all pretty general. You start going in to semantics but those were not being discussed.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
general
And because it was general, there are arguments for both sides.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:39 PM PST up reply actions
But who is overall better? There’s no argument when it boils down to it. And that was the discussion… not who has the most yards passing in a season.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
no argument in your mind
We’re just going in circles at this point.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:42 PM PST up reply actions
No doubt.
’Cause if it were me running the show, I woulda axed ya long ago.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
If I was less patient
I would have axed several people long ago.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:41 PM PST up reply actions
laws
Much like the Constitution protects the minorities on the fringe of society (protects the speech we hate, not the speech we love), I think my patience allows for a broader community. As you two have proven, not everybody can get along, but it’s not one person’s belief about who this community should include.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:44 PM PST up reply actions
I was honestly trying to avoid him.
Dude kept responding to my comments.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Not right away of course… I woulda suggested toning it down or something first.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
no a teacher
But this is not life and death stuff so I just take a step back, take a breath and move forward. I figure people will recognize the extremes on each side and find better ways to spend their time on the site that getting caught up in the muck. It becomes a problem when users make it about themselves. I won’t put up with that and have banned accordingly in the past.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:45 PM PST up reply actions
It's not about a single one person.
It’s about upholding a certain standard. I don’t have a problem with people who address issues that happen to be negative… I do have a HUGE problem with it when it is all that is done or said on consistent basis.
How that equates to the users making it about them, I’m not sure. Quality should always be first and foremost. When consistent negative comments detract from the quality, you then have yourself a chink in the “quality”.
And maybe if someone like me (or others even if I am banned someday) who confronts it enough, maybe then and only then will it be looked at and adjusted to make EVERY persons experience on here quality.
As I told James a couple days ago, I don’t have these same issues on other sites that have a more firm set of rules to filter our folks whose primary reason is to provoke. Balance needs to be enforced at some point.
I ONLY have these types of deals with a certain type of user. There are plenty of plenty of folks on here who I have had productive conversations with regarding football topics.. who comment both negatively AND positively.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
plenty of other people...
are able to have perfectly civil discussions with salary_cap without throwing out troll this and troll that. I make my points to him and if he keeps going I move on to another discussion.
Much like a family picnic, I’m not going to want to talk to everybody on the site. There are going to be people who rub me the wrong way. But I really prefer not permanently banning people because of content. That is a very slippery slope that the site has already teetered on and I’m stepping back from that where possible.
If he’s miserable as a 49ers fan, so be it. I have plenty of other people I can enjoy discussions with on this site when it comes to more positive things. We don’t have an ignore button within the network, but I have my own non-tangible ignore button that works wonders.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 9:06 PM PST up reply actions
Well we are not all built the same.
So when someone is following me around trying to provoke me, as I am in real life, I am not so good, or as good as you as standing down from it… Maybe that’s a character flaw, maybe it isn’t. And in different cases I imagine it can surely be both.
If I did have a tangible ignore button, you’d see the person I’ve been over the past two years having meaningful and productive conversations with other Niners Nation members. But there is always going to be that one thing that triggers me.
Not everyone has the luxury of using a non-tangible ignore button because they simply are not built the same. And maybe from an early age, these same people were taught to stand up for what they believe in and don’t take stuff from anybody, regardless of who they are.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
To add
When have I, or anyone else that has expressed the way they feel about certain people on here deliberately gone out of our ways to provoke those folks in to a flame war every time we log on here? That’s what these certain people (in essence) are doing. And who knows if they really ARE fans… that can’t be proven.
But it goes beyond a “group think” it goes much, much deeper than that. Some people on here are here only to piss people off because in some sick way, they get gratification out of it or something. Who knows? Maybe it’s a misery loves company type of deal. But whatever it is, it isn’t about talking football with fellow fans and having slight disagreements here and there like normal peopled do.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I acknolwedge that but
you said you had factual data. I don’t dismiss Montana’s clutchness, and I’ve said there are good reasons to think Montana is as good or better.
Strange...
Thought I read above by you that Marino was better.
you could argue Marino was better I in fact think he was.
You didn’t just say that a few minutes ago?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I do think Marino was better
if you think Montana had a better career qualified by SB wins then, of course, Montana had the better “career”. I thought Marino was the best pure passer ever, one of the greatest.
Yeah...
Who cares about post-season and stuff. Overrated anyway.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Overrated
The postseason is kinda overrated, at least as a measure of who’s the best team. Remember, because the playoffs are one-and-done, the odds are against even a really great team winning the Super Bowl. For example, a first seed with a whopping 70% chance of beating its opponents has only a 49% chance of winning the Super Bowl (.7*.7=.49).
That’s basically a 50-50 shot!
It's a fact
Simple probability says the champion often won’t be the team with the best chance of winning.
Don’t get me wrong, I love the playoffs and am ecstatic we made them. But don’t confuse the “champion” with the “best team,” as they aren’t the same thing.
I actually understand what you are saying, and is technically not incorrect, but it is really silly.
The year the Patriots went 18-1 were they the best team? I dunno, probably so. But it is a completely moot point because they got beat in the big one fair and square. Even if they still win that game 9 times out of 10 that was the time they didn’t so they weren’t the best team on that day. That is all that matters.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 31, 2011 10:10 AM PST up reply actions
Personally, what's "silly" to me...
…is to judge the “best team” based on a game or two. You may see the difference between being the “best” and being the “champion,” but I suspect most fans don’t.
So what if most fans don't
It doesn’t matter.
This is kind of the point of sports, the best team doesn’t win in every single situation, if they did, it wouldn’t be so compelling.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 31, 2011 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
agree
The best team in a single situation wins. Sometimes that ends up being the best team, and sometimes it’s the best team “right now.”
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 10:40 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
For sure
One of the things that makes the NCAA tournament so much fun is the underdogs can slip in.
But you have to balance that against the desire to reward quality team play over an entire season. A one-and-done playoff system isn’t the only way of doing things. Other sports use playoff series precisely to ensure the results are more about skill than chance.
World Cup
You get a round-robin group stage. Upsets do happen in those, but more often than not most of the best teams usually come out of that for the final 16.
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 10:42 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Champion is the "best team".
Doesn’t matter how you get there, it’s what you do to get there and how you win it all that matters the most.
All the rest is garbage. Stats don’t mean anything once the post-season starts. It’s virtually a new season one game at a time… and the team that gets there and wins it all, could be 8-8 when they get there.
They may not have put up the best numbers statistically but they still have to beat those “better” teams to get to that point… which in turn in FACT makes them better that year.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
So, if the Rams had won it all last year...
…you would say they were the “best team” in football? I don’t see the logic of that, but you’re obviously entitled to your opinion.
Then the Rams won the Super Bowl, that is all that matters.
If you want to argue another team was a better team, fine, argue you that all day and night, you might be right. But at the end of the day it doesn’t matter in the slightest. Ask the team that is better if they think that or even care.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 31, 2011 10:25 AM PST up reply actions
Oops, I meant the Seahawks
People were up in arms they made the playoffs with a losing record. If they had won the Super Bowl, I guarantee you people would have freaked out and would care a lot more about the difference between the “champion” and the “best team.”
Also
The “best team” is the team that plays the best as a team to go to the Superbowl and win.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
But that's precisely the problem
Often the “champion” didn’t play the best as a team all year. Rather, they played well over a handful of games in the playoffs. Like you said above, the playoffs are “virtually a new season one game at a time.” A team that plays mediocre all year can become champion just because they happen to get hot for a few games in the playoffs.
I’m not saying this is evil or wrong, just that I take the playoffs with a big grain of salt.
Well then they weren't the best team.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I didn't read it as that being your point.
You are saying that often the best team is not the team who wins the Superbowl orginally… if you stand by that, then no, that’s not what you were saying.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I must have miunderstood you
To clarify, if the Seahawks had won the Super Bowl last year, would you say they were the best team in football in 2010?
But they didn't
and no 7-9 team ever has… so it’s a bit of an exaggeration… but if they indeed peaked in the playoffs and beat all four teams, then yep, absolutely.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Wow
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one because it seems self-evidently wrong to think that a 7-9 team could really be the best team in football just because it got hot during the playoffs.
I can guarantee you, if it did happen, there would be a rules change to make sure it never happened again.
And you NEVER take playoffs or SB's
“with a grain of salt” … that’s why they play the game. That’s why it exists.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Why?
I’m not saying they shouldn’t play. Just that I’m not foolish enough to think the team that wins is therefore the best team in football.
You are that foolish if you don't believe that.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
If a playoff team beats another playoff team, they were better when it mattered the most… it really doesn’t matter what the team that got beat did before that, because they lost when it counted the most…. which consequently does not make them the “best team”
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
If you have to use the argument, “But they were the better team if…” You’re probably almost never going to win that argument.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Herm Edwards:
“You play to win the game”
Everything else is secondary… whoever wins the Superbowl was the best that year, despite their stats and regular season record.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
playoffs
I think the easiest clarification is “they were the best when it mattered.”
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 11:00 AM PST up reply actions
Yes.
That’s basically what I have been saying.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Wait
I thought you’ve been saying that being best in the playoffs is the ONLY thing that matters when it comes to defining the best team in football in a given year.
He said “they were the best when it mattered.”
Which pretty much to me means they were the best… because who wants to be the best when it doesn’t matter? That makes no sense.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
As I understood it...
…he was saying there’s a difference between “being the best” and “being the best when it matters.”
being the best when it matters
is the equivalent of being the best “right now” in the playoffs. That’s all. It has nothing to do with the best team for the season. Just the best “right now”
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 11:29 AM PST up reply actions
I have a big problem with taking the entire thing with a grain of salt though.
It is perfectly acceptable the best team doesn’t win. I don’t think anyone from the 18-1 Patriots care at all if anybody thinks they best team that year. They care about that little ‘1’ in the loss column.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 31, 2011 11:06 AM PST up reply actions
Of course it's perfectly acceptable
Like I said, there’s nothing evil or immoral about the playoffs, lol. By “grain of salt” I just mean I’m skeptical that the NFL playoffs do a good job of determining the best team in football in a given year.
Well that's your problem then I suppose.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
It’s a good thing you don’t have to wear that burden haha
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Fair enough
That makes more sense.
Not sure there is a better way that is feasible. Some sort of ‘series’ or double elimination type thing?
Don’t think it is doable or very beneficial. Even in something like the Champions League each matchup is 2 legs, but for the final they just have a single game. Part of it is just to make it more of an ‘event’ and it is more compelling that way.
Soccer is a sport that the best team wins probably even less than any other so that is probably a different conversation…
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 31, 2011 11:25 AM PST up reply actions
Agreed on all counts
I’m not sure there’s a better system. Maybe rankings of some sort like in tennis, but that’s fraught with problems, too.
The argument is important, though, because it gets echoed in college sports where people want a playoff to determine who’s #1.
My feeling is a playoff would be immensely entertaining, but not much better at reliably determining who the best team was that year.
there'd be plenty of debate
But it would definitely be entertaining seeing who might get hot at the end. And given more teams a chance to win the “national championship game.” As with any tournament, debate would continue on, but it would still be more entertaining than the current bowl structure.
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 11:38 AM PST up reply actions
Exactly.
And they obviously were not the best team that year.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
it's all just linguistic games on both sides of the argument
You have your definition of what constitutes the season, I have my definition, Virginia9er has his definition.
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 11:33 AM PST up reply actions
True
To me, though, the acid test is a losing team like the Seahawks. Although Drew’s response to that hypo is consistent with the position he’s taken throughout this debate, I do wonder if he would react the same if such a scenario actually did materialize in real life.
Actually, wait, it's not purely semantic......
…and perhaps this analogy will clarify why. Say you’re a scientist trying to determine whether A causes B. You run an experiment 19 times, and in the first 18 trials, you find that A does indeed cause B. So, you decide to hold one last trial to confirm once and for all that A causes B.
On the 19th trial, however, A fails to cause B for the first time. Does it make scientific sense to dismiss the first 18 positive results just because the 19th result, which you arbitrarily deemed decisive, did not? Of course not, that would be junk science.
the problem with that comparison...
The two teams playing in the Super Bowl at most play twice over the course of a season (if they’re scheduled as non-conference opponents). I get the point you’re trying to make, but I don’t think the comparison is quite the same.
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
Variance
Some people just aren’t going to accept that there is always some variance and luck in sports. Better teams can lose to worse teams sometimes. If it happens in the playoffs, that loss is treated with a large degree of importance.
This is not to dismiss the validity of the playoffs. IMO, it’s the difference between determining a CHAMPION and determining the BEST TEAM. The two things are related, but not perfectly even. But I still think it’s more fun and dramatic to determine a champion rather than a perfectly-accurate “best team.”
by sycasey on Dec 31, 2011 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
True, but it doesn't alter the point
You can’t reach a reliable scientific conclusion based upon a single trial you arbitrarily deem to be the only one that matters (i.e., the Super Bowl). Yes, in a strictly semantic sense, that’s the only trial that counts because you’ve defined it that way by rule. But the definition itself is still flawed because it yields a conclusion based upon a single trial, ignoring everything that came before.
Playoffs
are not about “who the best team is”… its about getting it done when it matters most. You might be “the best team” by beating up a bunch of mediocre teams in the regular season, nut the playoffs are about playing the best of the best, and getting it done, winning to the end.
by musamonster on Dec 31, 2011 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
What if you beat great teams in the regular season...
…then lose to a mediocre team in the playoffs like the 2010 Seahawks? The playoffs aren’t necessarily about playing the best of the best. If that were so, we’d pick the best teams ever year without regard to division.
And I agree the “best team” isn’t necessarily the team with the best W-L record for all the reasons you mention. It’s the team that played the best against the best opponents during the regular season AND playoffs. The point is the football playoffs are a poor proxy for that.
The reason is that the playoffs are single elimination — you have to go undefeated to become champion. That’s in contrast to a playoff series in baseball or basketball where it doesn’t matter if you lose any one game as long as you win the series.
baseball
I like baseball’s playoff structure the best for determining the best overall team in the playoffs. It’s not perfect, but it goes further considering a team has to win 11 games to win it all. Add in only one wild card previously and it limited the number of “sub-par” teams that often got in. I do think the second wild card can help considering what has happened with the Yankees, Red Sox and Rays in the AL East in recent years. Of course, the Red Sox screwed themselves this past year.
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 1:09 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The NBA Champions
Are probably the closest thing to a “best team” every year, out of the four major sports. That’s simply because the winner of an individual baseball game is subject to more variance than a basketball game, and the NBA also has long series to boot (as opposed to football).
by sycasey on Dec 31, 2011 2:02 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
soccer
If we want to take this to its logical conclusion, European soccer has one of the best systems. The Premier League has no postseason tournament, rather the team that accumulates the most points wins. They make up for no postseason tournament with things like the FA Cup and UEFA Champions League tournament.
by David Fucillo on Dec 31, 2011 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
You make a fine point...
…and that’s just the number of wins it takes. The average World Series champ probably plays as many games in the post season as a Super Bowl champ does in an entire season (regular and playoffs combined). So, not perfect, but certainly more reliable than football.
And it’s not just the number of games played, but how you have to win them. While there are myriad ways to win 11 out of 16 games, there’s only one way to go 3-0, which is what it takes to be Super Bowl champ.
Marino vs. Montana
Marino put up better career numbers, but are you saying if you were in a must-win game you’d take Marino over Montana? If so, can you specify why?
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:18 PM PST up reply actions
Marino is better by counting numbers
Mostly because he played longer and usually had more passing attempts per season. It’s also fair to mention that he was less often injured, because that does have value.
However, by rate stats Montana comes out ahead in virtually every one: better QB Rating, better Yards/Att, better completion %, and better TD/INT ratio. So was Marino better because he got more yards, completions, and TDs simply by throwing more passes? I’d say no. When Marino and Montana were both on the field and healthy, Montana was the better QB.
If the argument is that Marino had more “career” value because of his durability and longevity, I could see the argument for that. But it would have been nice to see at least one championship season out of him.
Statistics aside... they played in completely different offensive systems as well.
Niners ran the ball quite a bit.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Russell's teapot
Just because an argument exists, doesn’t mean it’s a good argument.
Ougadas on Vernon Davis and the anemic 49ers offense:
" Our best weapon (is) a 6’3" 250 pound ballerina with cinderblock hands..."
I'm not sure Russell's teapot...
…means what you think it does. At least, I’m not seeing the connection.
that...
is the great thing about opinions.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 8:11 PM PST up reply actions
opinions can still make a person look like a total jackass
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I'm glad you agree that you look that way most of the time.
Finally starting to see the light?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Every QB has to start somewhere
In the Marino vs Montana arguement, Marino may have been the better pure QB. But Montana owned the word “Clutch”… Something Marino, and even Peyton Manning (for the most part) have not shown at the biggest times.
Wining one or two Super Bowls, you might just have a really good team around you. but win three or four, and you own the world “Clutch”.
The other knock I have on Marino is, if he was surrounded by shoddy teams, it was on him to demand better of his team, his organization, or to push to move to another team. Yes, a lot of this was out of his hands, but with some 17 years in the league, and with his stature, he had more power than most players have.
The thing about Marino is that he wasn’t on shoddy teams. People always reference that, but Marino didn’t, all by himself lead the teams to 13 and 14 win seasons on a regular basis…
Push came to shove in the playoffs, and there was nobody better than Montana… including Marino.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
by Drew Kerr on Dec 30, 2011 8:12 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Absolutely
Marion or Peyton Manning might be the best “regular season QBs” ever, but getting it done in the playoffs ware where it counts. You can beat up on little teams all season long, but the playoffs are about getting it done, now, when it means the most, when it all counts, again the best of the best. That determines champions, not averages against mediocrity.
Ummmm
Still missing the obvious here. Cannot compare Montana’s era to Alex’s. Its a whole different world. Rafael Palmeiro isn’t considered an equal or better to Mickey Mantlel.
Palmeiro was taking roids...
Should Smith be taking them too?
That said, we are one of the few teams with an 80s era defense.
The whole era was on steriods
This whole era is blessed with rules that make passing the ball much easier. Stat inflation is ridiculous. Not even worth comparing.
by bignerd on Dec 30, 2011 8:55 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
HTS and I just got in to this discussion the other day in comparing statistics...
And the era’s are much closer in numbers than what you would think.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
The QB numbers aren't that close.
What was considered a great statistical season in the 80’s, 25 starting QBs today match those stats per season. I’m fine with comparing a lot things to the 80’s but not the season total QB stats.
I’m not one of those who thinks a QB has throw for huge stats to be successful or win a SB. But taking the stats of SB QB in the 80’s and using them in a comparison today doesn’t work for me. 55% comp with 3000 yards was Pro Bowl QB, now its exhibit A the QB needs to sit the bench.
The only thing we really found that had significant change was completion percentage.
Yardage, Average per throw, TD’s, INT’s, Rating, etc… were all extremely close.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
How did you compare?
Looking at league averages? Just curious.
It is interesting that a lot of passing records were set during the late 70s and 80s by guys like Fouts and Marino, then went unbroken for many years after.
If I remember correctly, there were rules changes in 1978 that tipped the balance in favor of offenses. That was the watershed year.
Averages...
And yes, we were comparing from the early 80’s on.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Not totally on averages though.
If you look at the leader boards, the quality quarterbacks were putting up relative numbers to today’s NFL leader boards both on ground, air, and defense.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I just realized that sentence needed to be broken up in to two… quarterbacks obviously don’t play defense or run the ball. What I meant is that each of the statistical categories were similar from the middle up… the bad teams were much worse than the bad teams of today’s era which somewhat skews the numbers to appear in favor of this era… particularly at the QB position.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Honestly, I find it a bit hard to believe that this is true. Just taking a cursory glance and comparing the average QB Rating of the last 3 years to Marino’s best year (1984) and it isn’t close. In 1984 the league-average passer rating was 73.2. In 2011 it’s 82.3. When you consider that’s an average across all QBs, including the bad starters and the backups who got playing time, it’s a pretty dramatic difference.
Other stats are less dramatic, but still clearly favor the modern QB.
Average Passing Yards Per Game:
1984 – 205.9
2011 – 228.8
TD/INT ratio (per attempt):
1984 – 4.3/4.1
2011 – 4.2/2.9
League Completion :
1984 – 56.4
2011 – 60.0%
Sack % (per attempt):
1984 – 8.4
2011 – 6.4
So basically, QBs completed fewer passes, threw more INTs, and got sacked more in 1984 than they do now.
The problem with that...
Is that averages are skewed by the bottom of the barrel players from the earlier era. If you take from the middle of the pack and up, it’s a lot closer than that.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And if you look at some of those years in the 80's
and compare them now… there are a lot of quarterbacks that do in fact compare (outside of, again, completion percentage).
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Why only compare with the upper half?
Part of the value in having a great QB is how much better than what else you might have instead of him. As such, we should compare to all QBs to determine true value. Having a good QB in 1984 meant much more than in 2011, because the replacement-level QB in 2011 can do more for you.
And even just looking at the upper echelon, I don’t see it. Here are the leaders in QB rating for each year:
1984:
1 Dan Marino 108.9
2 Joe Montana 102.9
3 Tony Eason 93.4
4 Neil Lomax 92.5
5 Steve Bartkowski 889.7
2011:
1 Aaron Rodgers 122.5
2 Drew Brees 108.4
3 Tom Brady 105.1
4 Tony Romo 102.2
5 Matt Schaub 96.8
The 5th best QB Rating in 1984 wouldn’t even crack the Top 10 in 2011. That’s a pretty dramatic difference, IMO.
How about passing yards per game?
1984:
1 Dan Marino 317.8
2 Neil Lomax 288.4
3 Dan Fouts 287.7
4 Phil Simms 252.8
5 Bill Kenney 233.1
2011:
1 Drew Brees 339.1
2 Tom Brady 326.5
3 Aaron Rodgers 309.5
4 Eli Manning 305.8
5 Matthew Stafford 301.2
The 2nd most passing yards in 1984 doesn’t even make the Top 5 today! It is clearly easier to put up passing stats today than it was in Marino’s day.
Again...
You are using averages… You are cherry picking stats to prove your point. I looked at it a lot more in depth than what you are providing here.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And I didn't just look at a single season from the 80's and 90's
I looked at all of them.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Cherry picking?
I looked at the league leaders in a given season, and the difference is still there. I also looked at league averages, and the difference exists.
Tell you what, why don’t you show your work and we’ll discuss that.
Okay, see what you want I guess rather than doing extensive research.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Show me your stats
I’m happy to look at them. So far all you’ve done is pick away at my stats rather than provide any positive evidence of your own. If it’s true that the difference in passing numbers between the 80s and the modern era is small, then I’d like to see it.
I’d like to see it because when I go season-by-season and look at the average passing numbers and the league leaders in the two eras, it seems clear to me that there is a difference between then and now. But if there is evidence that proves me wrong, I’m happy to look at it and modify my opinion.
Your move.
QB rating is about nonsense
There are many, many better measures of QB efficiency, and they pretty much all agree Smith isn’t in the same universe as Montana.
Not yet...
But if he led the team to a couple Superbowl victories and made some plays like he has in the Eagles, Lions, and Benglas games to do it, then I think there would at least be discussion.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And this is not to say the discussion is legit...
Because Montana is the most accurate and clutch quarterback to ever play…
Just saying, conversation would be there and some people would try and make the argument… the same way people try and claim Steve Young was better.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Great write-up
Thanks for the analysis of Pearlman’s article. I think if Harbaugh were to read the article, he would be happy, since he does not want anyone to acknowledge just how good this team or any of its players are.
Call Alex a ‘crap player’….while he drives our offense down the field with his dinks and dunks and we beat your favorite team, whoever that is…….the article is laughable.
Glad that article was addresses
I hate it when big media talks crap. We here literally have more knowledge we see all the games listen to all the interviews, plus the guy hates Tebow’s religion so he has a vendetta against a seemingly nice dude which is super irritating… This guy is a weiner and we aren’t the only ones who have issue with him him, ask anyone from Chicago
by Clark_Kent on Dec 30, 2011 1:18 PM PST via mobile reply actions
LMAO, he claims he's not a hater but then writes this....
bq.
All of this may, too, sound like an insult. But it isn’t. Against the Steelers last night, Smith made several exceptional throws. And by several I mean two. One was a middle-of-the-field strike to Vernon Davis, and the other was a run-one-way-and-throw-the-other dazzler, also to Davis, an elite NFL tight end who could probably make Caleb Hanie look competent.
Really Hanie?? The QB that wrecked Chicago’s dreams of playoffs after playing two putrid offenses in Den & KC? OK, that’s not hating, clown!!
Niners,Nets,Reds & USC!!!
The Most Interesting Man In The World---->Mikhail Prokhorov!!!
It also ignores
the fairly large number of catchable balls Vernon has dropped this season. I like him, but his play (not the attitude) reminds me a bit of Terrell Owens- real talented, real physical, sometimes great, but also drops more throws than guys who are a bit less talented.
I think Alex is a slightly above average NFL starter, with the potential to be solid, if not great. But, I am amazed at how much media writers go out of their way to avoid complimenting him, while absolutely slurping upon a lot of dudes who are not significantly more talented than he.
"Football combines the two worst things about America: It is violence punctuated by committee meetings" -George Will
by lottwasgangsta on Dec 30, 2011 2:44 PM PST up reply actions
Another Alex Smith gets no respect article
zzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzz
Reporter: “Alex, is it fair to say you are the least interesting QB in the NFL?”
Alex: “No question”.
I’ve heard of Ron Perlman
I only take issue with one thing ...
“… NinersNation.com! where you get smart analysis with darn good looking writers.” Just not sure about the “good looking writers” part!!
Happy New Year, All!
by 49erFanSince1950 on Dec 30, 2011 1:24 PM PST reply actions
Perhaps there should be
a NN 2012 Calendar for the Ladies! LMAO
by danknerd49 on Dec 30, 2011 1:33 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
only for the ladies?
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
Follow the Chicken on Twitter
by SportsChicken on Dec 30, 2011 6:49 PM PST up reply actions
A little love from a local writer
here, who in the past hasn’t had a whole lot of positives to say about Alex.
AleX Smith is my favorite person QB of the 49ers of all time
granted he isn’t the best QB of all time the Niners have had as we know, and yes I would take Joe, Steve and Jeff over Alex given the option (that being playing at their best) but as a person Alex is the man. How much has he been through and yet maintained not only his professionalism but also being the better person in all of it.
I hope Alex stays with the team for the remainder of his career, be it a back up in a year or two if need be, and eventually being inducted in the the Niner HoF as he is that great of a caliber teammate imo.
I work a meaningless job in marketing fulfillment and if I had to go through the crap Alex has in his career in mine I would have have burned the place to the ground, I give him mad props for his ability to remain focused and determined despite the blow black and dysfunction he has had to endure over the years.
I am in awe of the satisfaction that Harbaugh has brought to the team in whole and to Alex this season as it has been a long time since the Niners have had any sense of accomplishment as I remember in the late 80s and the 90s (times I can recall football as being a youngin’).
Those that dis Alex, so be it, it hasn’t and will not phase him and I think it actually empowers him to strive to do better and with Harbaugh having confidence in him along with the team as a whole coming together (the OL most importantly), Alex has been the exact QB he needed to be this year and will hopefully improve even more next year if he is around, which I sure hope he is.
Also – Great article Wes! Pearlman is delusional it appears.
People talk about a strong running game carrying Alex...
Jeff Garcia was playing behind Ray Brown and Jeremy Newberry who carried Charlie Garner to 1150 yards in 2000
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 2:50 PM PST up reply actions
Indeed they were.
Ray Brown is arguably one of the most underrated linemen ever. Dude had 1 All-Pro selection and was amongst the best guards in the game for years. He just got overshadowed by playing at the same time as guys like Gogan and Nate Newton. Newberry was a top 4-6 center in the league for a few years. Garner was alright… It was a shame Hearst’s injuries were so bad. He would have been the best back the Niners ever had.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:13 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
but Jeff Garcia was
much better than Alex at everything. And the run game has been non existent at times this year; the defense/st has carried the niners….including MVP Akers.
Jeff Garcia had a quality Offensive line, a solid run game and TO to throw to
He had 2 really great years when all those things were around… Then fell into league averageness.
He was fantastic in 2000 and 2001… And 2002 which was his last really good year, his stats look like Alex’s do now. After that he fell off a cliff.
2000 – he was throwing to TO and Jerry Rice with Stokes as his #3.
2001 – Rice was gone and Garcia’s yardage dropped by 700 yards but he got Garrison Hearst back from injury and he had a 1200 yard season on the ground with another 350 receiving.
2002 – Hearst only had 879 yards carrying the ball and Tai Streets was our #2 WR. TO still had 100 catches for 1300 yards in 14 games. Garcia’s numbers were 62.1% for 3344 yards and 21 TDs 10 Ints. The part people forget — This was Garcia’s first year without Ray Brown which meant his running game lost 300 yards of production.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:25 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Speaking of...
…nevermind
by sundaysfinest on Dec 30, 2011 3:35 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
Streets!
I remember that guy!
Speaking of Garcia, I think he was the best QB who never was. 2 great years… you have to wonder how good he would have been had the Niners been able to keep the team and talent together. That he had to go to the Browns was such a shame.
He was throwing to TO and Rice and went 6-10 and missed playoffs.
Smith is 12-3 throwing to Crabtree and a blocking sled.
Point is – its a team sport.
That's sort of a diss to Morgan, Davis, Williams, and Ginn
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Not very cool man ...
Those players all have done some good things for this team. And Morgan was looking to be our number one before he got injured.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
it's an argument that can be made
It might be a slight to them, but Jerry Rice and Terrell Owens in those days were Jerry Rice and Terrell Owens
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 11:31 PM PST up reply actions
I know that.
I just think him calling our other wide outs “blocking sleds” is kinda harsh. They have been pretty key in certain moments.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Maybe..
Either way… felt it was kind of a undeserved diss.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Not saying it wasn't funny. I actually chuckled for a sec...
I just though about it for a second and was like…wait a minute…
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I guess Kyle Williams and Josh Morgan popped in my head when I read that.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Come on, man.
Let me slide with this one… :)
sometimes...
it can provide excellent context.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 11:38 PM PST up reply actions
And in fact, Morgan was playing better than Crab at one point early this year.
Who knows what kind of numbers he may have wound up with if he had not been hurt?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Jerry Rice was on the decline at that point
In other words, Jerry Rice was not really Jerry Rice anymore.
And anyway, the offense was not really the problem in 2000. We lost because the defense sucked.
Nonsense
Jerry Rice is and always will be Jerry Rice
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 30, 2011 11:40 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
~1200 yards next two years in Oakland.
850 yards next to TO’s 1400 in 2000.
I wish we had somebody in that state of a decline.
by Mindless on Dec 30, 2011 11:45 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Why is not it very cool?
I was making a succinct point in a particular context. I do not think that I need to pad it up with legalese prolix about how I do actually like all those players, and it is not their fault they got hurt or do not have as much of god given talent to catch a football as Terrel Owens used to have.
Because you called them "blocking sleds" haha
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
If you noticed
In the next game Mr. Smith will be throwing to Mr. Crabtree and… a pair of…
Hmm… What would be a good analogy? :)
Swain and Hastings?
didn’t realize those guys have really played much.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
No, Jeff Garcia was not better than Alex at everything.
Most important – his best season was 12 wins. Alex will have 13 next week.
I was not talking about stats.
I was talking about better at everything.
And they most certainly listed as in career statistics, like it or not. (I do not, actually)
They can be in some situations.
QB is arguably the most important position on any team also.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I'm just talking in general
I know this is battling upstream since much of the media has this fixation on QB wins, but there is way too much context in a football game to say a QB has X amount of wins. There is some value to 4th quarter comebacks, but even those often require huge contributions from a lot of other players.
I just like to throw out “wins are not a QB stat” every so often even though it won’t really stick.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 10:37 PM PST up reply actions
But in my mind, it's very similar to a pitcher in baseball.
A pitcher usually relies on defense, and his players on offense to produce runs… a pitcher has W’s and L’s recorded in each column.
They’re different sports but similar in how they rely on getting the W’s and L’s. Offense and Defense.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And a pitcher is in theory the most important player on their team as well.
I do understand that baseball though is different in the sense that it is a team sport that relies a lot more on individual effort… as opposed to football relying more on a combined effort of individuals.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Well....
I’m not a big fan of pitcher wins either. Baseball has a lot more of the individual battles like pitcher versus hitter, but as with a QB, it takes so much more to get a W. A pitcher or QB can have a big impact on a win or loss, but not sufficiently enough for it to really make sense in my mind to award them the victories and losses.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 10:54 PM PST up reply actions
Just adding perspective to why it's probably looked at like that.
Whether it’s right or wrong is a whole other debate.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
So a pitcher can't throw a no-hitter?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
of course....
Assuming he strikes out 27 batters and hits a home run if he is in the National League.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 11:23 PM PST up reply actions
I think Tim Hudson has done this before.
Well not a perfect game or no hitter. But he’s had one or two 1-0 or 2-1 type games where he has also had the team’s RBIs…
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 30, 2011 11:31 PM PST up reply actions
in college
He was an all-purpose guy. Great hitter.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 11:34 PM PST up reply actions
Yea.
One of my favorite players ever, even before he was a Brave. Just a classy dude.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 30, 2011 11:41 PM PST up reply actions
my only problem...
was his decision to get in a bar fight the night before his ALDS start against Boston back in 2003. Not pleased with that result.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 11:44 PM PST up reply actions
Fair point
I had forgotten about that actually.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
by Virginia9er on Dec 30, 2011 11:47 PM PST up reply actions
doesn't make him a bad guy
Just sucked that it seemed to cost him in that game. I’m still bitter about losing that series.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 11:56 PM PST up reply actions
Why do they all have to be strikeouts?
If he pitches routine grounders all day long, still pretty responsible for the win… there’s been a lot of shutouts through the history of baseball that have ended 1-0 or 2-0… Maybe someone hit a double to score a couple runs, but how much does that out weigh the shutout?
Anyway, like you said, it’s a circular debate and one that may never end.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
He can. And a hockey goalie can post a shutout.
And Quarterback can orchestrate a game winning drive.
They are all individuals in a position to influence the game to a degree that other players can not match.
Okay, no-hitters definitely count
But how many of those are there in a season? The reality is that pitcher wins are hugely influenced by other factors that the starting pitcher can’t control (the quality of his run support, of his defense, and his bullpen). That’s why they aren’t a very good measure of pitcher quality.
And yet most good pitchers have a lot of wins.
And all bad pitchers got little.
If “W” are a bad statistic, “L” certainly is quite good. :)
MOST of them yes
But there are many other stats that are more accurate as to who is a good pitcher. Strikeout rate, for example. Or, you know, runs allowed.
W-L record in general is not a good stat for evaluating pitchers. Matt Cain has had an ERA better than league average every year, usually significantly better than league average, and yet has more losses than wins in his career. This is because of poor run support and bad luck, not because he’s a bad pitcher.
There are also plenty of examples of sub-par pitchers lucking their way into lots of wins. For example, Storm Davis won 19 games for the A’s in 1989, despite having an ERA a full run below league average. He got those wins because the A’s were a powerhouse that year, not because he was especially good.
Flawed logic. On multiple levels.
First, you criticize one statistic by contrasting it with another, similarly flawed statistic (ERA).
Then, you completely ignore that it is absolutely normal for any statistical measure to have outliers. In fact, the bigger your sample, the more outliers you will find.
And you top it off with leaving out the key definition: what exactly constitutes a “good” pitcher? If you pick one particular measure as your definition of what is “good” – of course that measure would correlate better. Its a circular logic.
First, you criticize one statistic by contrasting it with another, similarly flawed statistic (ERA).
ERA is flawed, but it is still a better measure of pitcher quality than Wins. Would you argue the opposite?
Then, you completely ignore that it is absolutely normal for any statistical measure to have outliers. In fact, the bigger your sample, the more outliers you will find.
True, however a pitcher’s W-L record has more outliers than other stats like ERA, WHIP, K/BB ratio, HR rate, and the like. It’s probably the slipperiest of all the mainstream pitching stats. And that’s why it’s not a terribly useful stat.
And you top it off with leaving out the key definition: what exactly constitutes a "good" pitcher? If you pick one particular measure as your definition of what is "good" – of course that measure would correlate better. Its a circular logic.
A good pitcher is one who does the most to prevent the other team from scoring runs while he’s on the mound. There is no one stat that proves it, of course, but Wins are one of the least valuable for evaluating how good he is, because they are so dependent on other factors the pitcher has no control over. ERA is too, but much less so.
Here you go again.
Self referencing assertions, nothing else.
Just go to any baseball site. Plot wins vs statistic of your choice. Asserting that it does correlate exceptionally well is silly. It is succinct, easy to interpret and understand. It is a excellent stat – that is exactly why it is usually the first one referenced – and the rest are just used to further improve understanding of performance. That is just a fact, like it or not, and it is well grounded.
Goalies in hockey, pitchers in baseball.
Some positions are just more important than others.
Wow...
How horribly uninformed this Pearlman guy is. This kind of ignorance should require medication.
By the same argument where he demonizes Harbaugh, Alex and the WCO as “Quarterbacking for Dummies”, he’s also slandered Bill Walsh, Joe Montana, Steve Young, McCarthy, Aaron Rodgers, Dennis Green, Warren Moon, Mike Holmgren, Brett Favre, Matt Hasselbeck, Andrew Luck, Mike Shanahan, John Elway and any other Coach and/or QB who’s utilized the West Coast Offense with any degree of success.
Way to go.
Next maybe we can diss Aldon Smith, Vic Fangio and the 3-4 defense as “Pass Rushing for Dummies”.
I saw this Pearlman article a few weeks back
I dismissed it quite quickly and got over it. Mostly the same way I do with Cohn’s articles, though this was worse than most of his stuff.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
OT: Why can't we swear here?
This isn’t a site aimed at children, so what’s the deal with not being able to use colorful metaphors?
It's the logo for my favorite band!
by positiveuphemism on Dec 30, 2011 1:49 PM PST reply actions
swearing
Swearing is allowed in game threads and other “live” threads like threads during the NFL Draft.
My reasoning for implementing this policy was that in live threads people are reacting in the moment to something. During a game you’re reacting to a play as it happens. The draft is a little bit more flexible in that regard since the picks went down a while back. But I still consider it in the emotion of the moment.
In just about any other thread that doesn’t involve certain breaking news, people are not reacting in the moment. It is just a regular discussion. My thought is that if people are planning on swearing in a comment, if they take a moment to think of something other than a curse word, it can help improve the discussion. Without needing an instantaneous reaction for a comment to be relevant, people can think through what they are saying.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 2:26 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I really like this rule by the way
If you can’t type something insightful or funny or interesting without swearing you should just stop typing. I think the site decorum keeps the trolls at bay personally.
This coming from someone who swears often in casual conversation.
by AptosNinerFan on Dec 30, 2011 2:46 PM PST up reply actions
I love the irony of his username
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 2:52 PM PST up reply actions
Thanks. This makes a lot of sense.
It's the logo for my favorite band!
by positiveuphemism on Dec 30, 2011 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
it's all just a clever marketing scheme to sell
more “Site Decorum” T-Shirts.
Maslow's theory of higher needs does not apply to Patrick Willis. He only has two needs: tackling people and finding people to tackle.
Alex is mentally one strong man....
Think about the meat grinder Alex has been through since being drafted. I think many other young Q.B.’s would have crawled under a rock & died.
Until this season, Alex has gone through:
*Annual Physical Beatings from very poor O-line personal
*Two Seperated Shoulders, one of which he tried to play through the pain.
*Mike Nolan openly trying to belittle him & question his manhood
*Mike Simgletary commenting that Alex was meek, and not his picture of a Q.B. leader
*Mike Martz embarrassing him by picking (what the hell was his name) as his choice to start over Alex
*Us fans booooing Alex on a National TV game & chanting for David Carr.
Im sure im forgetting other things too….
Alex Is A MAN….a very TOUGH YOUNG MAN, and how the hell can anyone question this guys balls & leadership & Character, Well, I don’t think anyone is any longer and.
Alex , a great majority of us fans are backing you now as you overcame and you clearly have EARNED to be the STARTING Q.B. of the NFC West CHAMPION 49ers.
But, Alex it dont end here….Rams next, Bye Week and then You Alex and the 49ers give us fans a New Year present…..Playoff Football Games, back we we belong , Playoff Games!
Pearlman's article
He’s got a knack for back-handed, condescending compliments, but his analysis of Smith is for the most part spot on.
And he is not saying (I don’t think) that Tebow is a better QB than Smith, rather that Tebow has the physical tools to excel at many sports. Smith does have above average athleticism at the QB position, but Smith’s physical prowess is not the kind that makes him an athlete on many different platforms.
If the Niner’s D doesn’t save the day by dominating many games, leaving the Niners with a 9-6 or 8-7 record (or worse), Smith is no longer perceived as a “game manager” or “adaptive” or “smart” by fans or national media — he is just “mediocre” or “average” or “bad”. But we tend to perceive players, especially QBs, and even more especially Smith, through the prism of team success (or team failures).
Otherwise, Smith delivered what Smith has all season, a series of dinks, dunks, and dils…
Smith doesn’t have to accomplish much to win….
When Coach Jim Harbaugh tells Smith to roll out and throw a three-yard screen to Gore, he does so. When Harbaugh tells Smith to hit Crabtree five yards out on a slant, he does so, too. The whole thing is uncomplicated and precisely scripted, the updated version of NFL Quarterbacking for Dummies
All painfully but plainly self-evidently true. And when you ask more of Smith, you get the first six years of his career. Smith is playing for a coach who is ultra conservative in his field position approach (to a fault) that he won’t even let the QB throw the ball on 3rd and goal from the 13 yard line when you NEED points with plenty of time left. Smith isn’t asked to do much at all, and he hasn’t done anything more than he’s been asked.
They've been "stretching the field" more as the season has gone on...
Alex has had a few poor throws but he’s had quite a few drops as well.
by AptosNinerFan on Dec 30, 2011 2:48 PM PST up reply actions
I can think of 4 bombs dropped off the top of my head.
I can think of like 5 poorly thrown long balls. And most of those were strategically thrown so there’s zero chance of an Int. It’s not a drastic difference really. VD has dropped 3 bombs and Crabs dropped a bomb down the right sideline… and I think another early in the season.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 2:54 PM PST up reply actions
Ginn...
didn’t drop it but had no idea the ball was like two feet away from him a couple games ago. Wasn’t the greatest pass as Alex was hit while he was throwing but should have been a TD.
by AptosNinerFan on Dec 30, 2011 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
Also a good point.
That’s 5 bombs that should have been caught.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:27 PM PST up reply actions
I definitely think
Smith should be ASKED to stand strong in the pocket and see/anticpate reads down the field more often, even though he has shown that is his problem.
Tebow
He doesn’t seem to have the tools to consistently complete passes at a successful level in the NFL. Smith struggles on the sideline deep ball and isn’t perfect, but I’ll take his accuracy over Tebow’s any day.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 2:56 PM PST up reply actions
of course
I’d like to see Smith be asked to make reads and anticipate open WR’s DOWN THE FIELD more, but that requires standing strong and confident in the pocket, and pocket awareness is not his strong suit.
I think he has improved at awareness
I’ve seen him moving around in the pocket and away from rushes at times. It is not a consistent thing, but I would contend he has improved in this area to some degree.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
His line is not always up to snuff.
When he has time to throw he is accurate and smart with the ball.
"Coach, we got this. We got this." - Frank Gore
REST IN PEACE MAURICE LUCAS 1952-2010 R.I.P #20
"They responded like mighty men." - Jim Harbaugh
by rise_stand_resist on Dec 30, 2011 3:07 PM PST up reply actions
i've seen it too
I wish Harbaugh would ask him to make plays that require him to improvise in the pocket so that come playoff time, Smith would be in theory more improved. In many ways I feel challenging for the no. 2 seed all year has hurt us in some respects, this being one of them — not having the flexibility to let Smith loose.
letting him loose
Part of the issue is that the team is implementing the offense on the fly. It is entirely possible Smith won’t be able to take things to some kind of “next level” but I also think this coming offseason, assuming he is back with the 49ers next year, will be both important and intriguing with a full offseason with Harbaugh and no lockout.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:10 PM PST up reply actions
My hunch is that
even though Harbaugh has always been a conservative coach even with a great QB, he’s not gonna change all that much. And of course I’m skeptical whether Smith can handle being cut loose, because he struggles with reading/anticpating and then making throws down the field. He’s very accurate with short/quick reads where he doesn’t have to think about a pass rush or sifting through multiple reads.
I agree to a certain extent
But that’s where the long offseason comes into play. Maybe Harbaugh can’t help him, maybe he can. He did some great things with Josh Johnson and Andrew Luck. Not saying they would have been ready without him, but he does deserve some level of credit. I just want to see what happens early next season after this offseason.
All we know is what has happened to date and the context of the situation will change to a certain extent with this coming offseason. I’m mildly optimistic, but at the same time not holding my breath. This offseason provides all sorts of opportunities that have me just as excited about it as the current season.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:16 PM PST up reply actions
I think you're probably right on this
The offense isn’t going to “open up” as much as more timing plays will be used in critical situations and there will be more nuanced offense.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
Looking for an insightful sports article in Esquire...
is like looking for a smoked brisket recipe in Vogue.
The guy actually writes for SI
what a dunce
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
Tebow
Say Tim Tebow is the exact same guy personality wise as he is today (nice, positive and righteous young man), but he’s Muslim instead of a Christian. What kind of press coverage or reaction would he get from “non football fans”?
Same coverage Muslims get now. Lowes would not sponsor him.
by bignerd on Dec 30, 2011 3:10 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
yep
It’s a point several people have made. It would definitely be different.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:11 PM PST up reply actions
Think of how many NFL players named Mohammed there have been
If any of them flaunted their faith as much as Tebow does his (which I think he does, because Reggie White was an ordained minister but never made a show of it on the field), there would be some pretty nasty reactions.
I asked a rabbi what he thought would happen if Tebow were Jewish. Didn’t get an answer though.
French fries are really Belgian, sausages and bagels have the same amount of protein, two countries' names mean "turkey", and Santa Claus was invented by the Coca-Cola company. Is life weird or what?
Debe ser verde y volante - Πράσινο και να πετάει - It's gotta be green and it's gotta fly!
by Rabbit T on Dec 30, 2011 3:41 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I wish Tebow was wiccan
and he did black magic on the sidelines. Fan reaction to that would be AWESOME.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:47 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Or better yet...
If he came out on the field running through a flaming pentagram… Oh yeah!
Now we know what Alex Smith does.
Some harsh voodoo..

.....
huh
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
Follow the Chicken on Twitter
by SportsChicken on Dec 30, 2011 6:53 PM PST up reply actions
People who say Smith doesn't go through reads and dinks and dunks don't know what they're talking about.
Last week, I watched on at least 10 occasions where Smith was getting to his 3rd reads and nobody was open. If WR’s are being blanketed, he’s obviously not gonna throw it.
He even commented recently on the throws out of bounds on some of those deeper passes and said that those indeed were throw aways because the WR was not open when he had to release.
Context makes a world of difference. And when people make comments based off of what they saw on TV, that’s basically making blind statements. The coaches know what’s up… and for the most part, a lot of the folks who are biased against Smith, or say he has played “average” or “bad” truly are not considering the context of ALL situations and games.
Smith has been playing better than average this year as evidence of a lot of games, 4th quarter heroics, some key-passes that normally he would have folded under, among a plethora of other factors.
We can get better at the position. I think most, if not all fans would not deny that. But he is our quarterback this year, and maybe longer. If he is for longer, I think what the coaches have seen week in and week out, not only in practice, but in the film break down sessions as well.
He is all we have at this point, and Harbaugh trusts him. Bottom line.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
- I think what the coaches have seen week in and week out, not only in practice, but in the film break down sessions as well will determine what is truly what.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
this offseason
I think most can agree this coming offseason is pretty significant in the development of the 49ers offense. Having an entire offseason to work together coming off a strong year has me quite intrigued about the possibilities. Nothing could come of it, or everything could come of it. I don’t really know, but I’m open to seeing what the start of next season brings.
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:19 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed
I think the biggest improvement needs to be from the O line in playing together and provifing good pass protection right from the beginning of the season,
If Smith is not our starter come Week 1 next year, I won’t be disappointed (depending on who the replacement is). But if he is our starter, I think that will speak very loudly as to what the coaches think of his potential.
Either way, I will support whatever decisions are made.
I am almost positive Scott Tolzien will not be on the roster either way though.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Tolzien
How come you don’t think he’ll be on the roster?
by David Fucillo on Dec 30, 2011 3:23 PM PST up reply actions
Because I don’t feel like he has the tangibles for what it takes to even be the third guy. We’ve seen it in the past few years to where a couple of teams got down to their third string QB.
And in watching him closely at Wisconsin, I never had confidence in him.
When I was watching warm ups at the game I was at here in AZ, he was missing guys by like 5-10 yards just in warm ups.
And I kinda feel like Harbaugh is gonna be a QB collector and use that 3rd spot until he finds a gamer. Tolzien really doesn’t fit the profile in my opinion and from what I have observed.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Because I don’t feel like he has the tangibles for what it takes to even be the third guy
Intangibles? I thought teams were looking for a warm body that could stand upright for the no. 3 QB spot.
I also don’t understand why the Niners would hold two rookie backups at QB. One of them needs to be a veteran with some game experience it seems to me. Considering Kaep’s presence, I don’t understand why we didn’t sign a veteran to be the no. 2 and have Kaep as the no. 3.
because if Smith goes down
and Kaep has to play, Harbaugh will a kick a FG from the opp 35 yard line on 1st down!
Not intangibles. Tangibles. Accuracy, foot speed, arm strength.
I think he has the tangibles to be a #3 personally. Never much more than that. He could develop into a solid #2 like a better version of Shaun Hill.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:49 PM PST up reply actions
Shaun Hill had intangibles at least.
Tolzien doesn’t…. or didn’t in college anyway.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Hill is very decent
he outplayed Smith a year or two ago when he was in Detroit. Hill probably gets us to the playoffs last year.
Hill got sacked twice as much as Alex behind the same line.
Hill probably gets paralyzed last year.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 5:53 PM PST up reply actions
Hill outplayed Smith?
You’re saying Hill was better last year in Detroit than Smith has been this year for us? By what measure?
Intangibles? I thought teams were looking for a warm body that could stand upright for the no. 3 QB spot.
Well that’s an odd way to look at it considering that a few 3rd string quarterbacks have had to play significantly over the past couple of years.
I also don’t understand why the Niners would hold two rookie backups at QB.
Because that is all there was basically. By bringing in young talent, they are a bit easier to groom and mold opposed to veterans who were stuck in their ways. And maybe when Harbaugh looked at Smith, he didn’t see a “project” he saw someone who was very adaptable and groomable.. I think he has proved that.
And I understand you don’t think highly of Kaep. That’s no mystery. But it’s also not relevant A) because he doesn’t play and is sitting in the shadows being groomed by the QB coach, Roman, and Harbs. And you can hope and wish that Kaep is gonna be the third stringer all you want; it’s probably not gonna happen. You don’t draft a guy 36th overall in a draft and give up on him after a season on the bench. Makes no sense unless he is a complete and total idiot in practice… which as evidence of where he currently is on the depth chart cleary is not the case.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
it does matter
if SMith gets hurt, Kaep is forced into action (too early) because he is no.2. This is why it makes sense for him to be a no.3 while he gets groomed and the team is contending in the event Smith gets hurt. The niners would deserved to get ripped if Kaep has to play in the postseason when they could have signed/traded for numerous veteran QBs with game experience, David Garrard being just one example. Nobody was talking about giving up on anybody, just the stupidity of having two rookie backup QBs on a team that is the no. 2 seed in the playoffs.
Let me ask you this...
Do you know FOR SURE that Kaepernick is not ready is Smith were to go down?
I don’t think any of us can say whether or not he is ready or not without seeing where he is at in his development.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Kaepernick's development is sort of a mystery to all of us at this point.
And even if Kaep is showing Smith up in practice, there’s no way Harbaugh is gonna hook Smith at this point in the season.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
the QB he was this preseason is not a mystery, and it shouldn’t have suprised anyone. But what niner fan feels comfortable seeing Kaep take over in the 2nd quarter of a divisional playoff game against the Saints after Smith goes down? Wouldn’t you be pissed that the FO didn’t pick up a veteran at any point?
You can’t really say that straight faced. Preseason was preseason and a lot of players did not look or play how they are now, at this point in the season.
Point is, it’s been 17 weeks since we last saw him. Nobody knows for sure where he is at.
If Smith went down, would I worry a little at first? Sure. I think most of us would. But who is to say that Kaep wouldn’t just come in there and ball out?
Point I am making is, you don’t know, I don’t know, nobody knows where he is at right now.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
But who is to say that Kaep wouldn’t just come in there and ball out?
I would because I have no good reason to. It’s not like Kaep is this polished 2nd round QB. He’s a project, who was awful in preseason. You are putting an extroadinary amount of faith/optimism in a QB who has never been a pocket passer to come in in a playoff game and be semi-competent.
There's no good reason to not either.
AGAIN, you have no clue as to where his development is at. You just simply don’t… as much as you may think you do, it’s not reality.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I'm not saying I do
If you suspect Kaep is a decent bet (50/50, like you say) to succeed if thrown into a playoff game his rookie year, then you feel comfortable with just about anyone. Yet I doubt you feel this way.
I said that Kaep was a 50/50?
And I am not saying anything you are implying here.
THE POINT… and maybe it’ll stick this time… is you don’t know, I don’t know, nobody except for the coaching staff knows at this point, this deep in the season where Colin Kaepernick is at in his development.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And awful in preseason?
How? Where? When? I guarantee you, I can fins just as many good plays from him as bad ones. There simply is not a whole bunch to go off of to be honest.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
so why do you want a rookie
QB without much to go off of to be the no. 2 QB of a no. 2 seed that may need him if Smith goes down?
I don't know what you mean.
What exactly are you asking?
Smith is healthy… Kaepernick is the back up. If Smith goes down, Kaep goes in.
He is a mystery to all of us at this point. He could, for all any of us know, be better than Smith right now.
You are asking a hypothetical “what-if” that’s not relevant.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
IIRC correctly
Dalton looked pretty atrocious at times in the preseason too… that turned out pretty good, didn’t it?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
if you recall correctly correctly?
/splitting hairs
Ougadas on Vernon Davis and the anemic 49ers offense:
" Our best weapon (is) a 6’3" 250 pound ballerina with cinderblock hands..."
No… not if it happened. It’s relevant to the point.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Just an fyi... Cam was terrible in the preseason
And well…we all know how he’s done since then.
by runningblack on Dec 30, 2011 4:25 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Sorry for the double post
But the pre-season doesn’t tell you everything about a player.
by runningblack on Dec 30, 2011 4:26 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
No he wasn't and no anyone didn't think that. Most folks were saying, "bust, bust, bust, J. Russell, etc"
ESPECIALLY after the preseason.. you’re basing all your bogus perception you’ve built in your negative mind about Kaep based off of a handful of plays in the Preseason… that is what everyone is trying to point out to you and it’s simply not sticking.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Who thought Cam
was the next JaMarcus?
I didn’t suspect such a dominant rookie season, but unlike Kaep, Newton demonstrated NFL quality skills in terms of making throws. You watched him at Auburn didn’t you? He was a much better player than Russell was at LSU, and demonstrated the skills that an NFL QB needs
I'm sticking with my orginal assement
I called Josh Freeman the next Duante Culpepper and this season he finally came around.
I’m putting Newton and Tebow in the same class as VY and Vick. Probably better players their rookie year than their 4th year in the NFL. Those bodies will begin to break down, ache, than its really hard for them to keep up with their more traditional QB duties.
In Cam’s case he does a have an arm. He still has a chance to go in the Steve Young, older Vick direction. Really depends which way he wants to develop.
not literally sure
but for all intents and purposes, I’m as sure of it as I am that I will have to take at least two dumps by new years eve.
And yet, you may eat something between now and then that constipates you that makes this statement incorrect.
And for all intensive purposes, I quite hope you do.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
The odds are stacked in Kaep’s favor fortunately. So it’s moot.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
The odds of success....
The odds of Harbaugh’s track record with QB’s.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Why not?
It’s a HIGHLY and VERY unlikely situation, but if they felt he was thee guy, then yep, I would trust them because they know more about football, breaking down film, etc. than I do.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
but you've said he
looks absolutely terrible in college and in warm ups. Do your instincts not matter? Why would you support it when you think he’s not a good no. 3 QB, let alone a starter?
Because I am not a professional head coach or offensive coordinator… I do have an opinion and a feeling about Tolzien, but it’s not the be all, end all. I have been right about a lot of my feelings and hunches in being on these boards over the past 2 or 3 or whatever years, and it’s just how I feel about Tolzien based on what I saw over the years at Wisconsin and the little bit I have seen in person.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
so if your hunches are generally right
why would you feel fine with the decision to go with Tolzien?
I wouldn't right now...
But it would basically take a miracle for him to be considered the starter… so your hypothetical is pretty ludicrous as it stands.
But if that miracle happened, I would like to think that there would be good reason for it.
Harbaugh is not gonna just come out next season and name Tolzien QB, is your hypothetical (as all of them are) is pretty ridiculous. So it’s a moot type of deal.
It’s similar to me saying, hey what would you feel if Nate Davis came back to start for the Packers next year? It’s a pretty lame hypothetical to be quite frank.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
but you said you'd support it
Why not?
It’s a HIGHLY and VERY unlikely situation, but if they felt he was thee guy, then yep,
If you had said, “no, I wouldn’t support it cause it’s a dumb idea — I’ve seen him play…” just as I would say under no conditions would I be okay if Nate Davis started for my team.
Wow.. dude…. just drop it already. It’s not a relevant topic.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Because Mike Singletary isn’t the one starting him. Harbaugh has earned quite a bit more benefit of the doubt.
It is pretty simple. Not all of us continually assert we know more than NFL coaches.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
I don't think Harbaugh's earned a blank check...
On anything BUT QBs. He’s worked wonders with them consistently enough that I’ll show faith in any decisions he makes with them until proven otherwise.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 3:52 PM PST up reply actions
I still think he will collect them (QB's)
like Sing did with a few different positions until he finds the next great one.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
He hasn't earned a blank check
for anything. His game management/strategy/playcalling is suspect at best. I give him credit for finding a good D coordinator at Stanford and keeping him with him in SF.
His game management/strategy/playcalling is suspect at best.
This is ludicrous. If it was that suspect the record wouldn’t be 12-3.
1. He’s had a few sketchy moments, no more than any other coach in the league, and especially for a rookie HC.
2. You don’t really know much about his actual strategies.
3. No one is really sure how much of the playcalling is Roman, how much is Harbaugh, or how much is any of the other offensive assistants.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
well
his game management (e.g. declining a 1st down to kick a FG, among some others) is suspect at best, awful at worst.
That the niners are 12-3 doesn’t necessariliy mean that it is NOT suspect, just that it hasn’t tangibly hurt them that much this season.
The Niners are 12=3 because the niners D has constantly stopped the opponent down the stretch when harbuagh was willingly giving the ball away with his conservative approach. I don’t care what defense I have, I do not like settling for less than a one possession lead when giving the ball back to the opponent for the last possession. He’s settled for that numerous times, and it will make me cry when it finally bites his ass in the playoffs.
Declining that penalty in the Dallas game is the only one I particularly remember being suspect, and it really wasn’t some massive transgression like people constantly make it out to be. The win percentage math backs that up.
There’s been various timeouts used that haven’t reflected well, but it is really hard to tell if that is all Harbaugh, Roman, Smith, or just some other personnel mistake. You just never really know and it hasn’t been that bad.
Be glad you aren’t a Cowboys fan this year, or an Eagles fan with Andy Reid’s horrid game management the past decade.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
I disagree.
Declining that penalty against Dallas was a terrible decision.
Take the yardage. Hell, take the yardage and then run three more run plays. Maybe you’ll bust one open. Either way, the worse thing that will happen is you get stopped and kick another field goal.
The way Akers has been playing this year, not taking the yardage was a mistake.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
I don't want to get into this again
There was already the huge fanpost after the game breaking down the win percentage which was a difference of about 1-2% either way…It really didn’t affect the outcome as much as people try to assert.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
The percentage difference is small
because it’s not given or even likely (especially with this team) that the Niners score 6 after taking that 1st down. What it doesn’t account for in that specific game is that it would have shaved another minute or two off the clock and made it nearly impossibel for the Cowbowys to score TWICE. Forget the stats. In that game in particular, it was a HUGE deal. Even if the Niners go 3 and out after the fact, they still win most likely.
The time theory doesn't work either
There were 11 minutes left. The Cowboys ran time off the clock on their last drive so there wouldn’t be any left for the 9ers after they tied it…
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
are you saying it's irrelevant?
you can’t possibly be saying that. Yeah, and that time doesn’t exist if the niners either kill time or ACTUALLY TRY AND SCORE A TD.
Not the decision itself, of course not
The reason it is questionable is the ability to put more points up not waste time.
The issue of wasting time is mostly irrelevant as the Cowboys ended up with plenty of time left and ran almost 2 minutes off once they got into FG range on the last drive. There were 11 minutes left at the time of the FG/penalty. If it occurred with 5-6 or even 8 minutes the time theory is much more valid. There was plenty of time left at that point though.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
the bonus
was being able to both score 6 and waste time. And if the niners score, even with no time run off the clock, the Cowboys have to score a two TD instead of a TD and FG to tie
Yes, it is about the TD instead of a FG. With 11 minutes left in a 2 score game the time wasn’t that large of a factor even if the 9ers scored a TD and took 2 more minutes off.
As evidenced by the fact the Cowboys ran almost 2 minutes off during their finally drive to keep the 49ers from having any time left…
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
Win Probability analysis says it wasn't a huge deal...
…even taking situational factors like time remaining into account.
I also don't understand how Smith
can be a B grade (very good QB) that is top 10, according to you, and yet you wouldn’t be “disappointed” to see the team let him go?
I would be a little disappointed; not gonna lie.
But if we let him walk, it’s for one or two reasons. Reason 1: We have a someone better replacing him. So why would that bother me? Reason 2: Our F.O. got outbid by another team and Smith sees more potential with that other team….
Note: Reason 2 is probably less likely than reason one… but neither reason is a given due to Smith being a very good quarterback THIS YEAR.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
neither seem likely
I mean, what are the odds of a top 10 QB being replaced by a better one? You’d have to list the QBs you think are better and then figure out whether it is feasible to acquire them.
Second, perhaps more likely, is that some other deluded franchise outbids us for him.
Either way, we still lose a top 10 QB, and the second scenario leaves us without a replacement.
If Peyton Manning is cleared and 100%...
…and the Colts want to unload him for a reasonable deal, should they grab Luck, then yeah… maybe Manning. A potential top 5 quarterback for a top 10ish quarterback? Maybe. Of course, the offensive concept doesn’t really cater to Manning’s strengths, so we would essentially need a completely new playbook… and the fact that he will be 36 years old doesn’t really strike me as too promising either…. so still, even in that scenario, I am a skeptic.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Not to mention Manning's knowledge on the offensive side of the ball probably supersedes
Harbaugh’s knowledge… Plus, Manning more than likely enjoy the idea of playing behind our offensive line or in coldish weather… so to me, I just don’t think it would be a good fit for either party.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
*would not enjoy the idea of playing behind our offensive line
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
The other point is about progression. A receiver should not just get open, but get open when the QB is making the reads. I keep on reading how Crabtree or some receiver was open and waving his arms wildly in the end zone while Alex was looking elsewhere. Of course, he was! He’s moved on to the next (or third) read since the first receiver was not open when he was supposed to be open. Timing and correct route running is the essence of WCO. And then there is the fan’s obsession with deep throws to go route runners from the Coryell offense.
All good points.
Thanks for the elaborations.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Ummm
you’ve got it backwards. When plays breakdown, WR’s have the opportunity to improvise and find soft spots that can be reached by the QB, but the QB’s job is to anticpate where these guy’s routes will get them to.
Not if the QB is on his back before that can transpire.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
This is true
But that is well into a broken play.
On a 3 step drop play if you are the first read you must be creating separation by the second step or the QB is going to his second read. He can’t wait on you.
Every time Jamie Dukes says something enlightening and informative about football Jerry Rice and I mount up on our flying grizzly bears and claim pirate treasure from the moon. That's how often it happens.
Tebow
I don’t get why people love him, or love to hate him…and I’m not religious, and I find the whole religion/religiosity business to be quite inane and dishonest.
The guy’s a good kid, just happens to be a sub-par, unorthodox QB who had no business being drafted in the 1st round, which has contributed to the mania…
He’s humble, soft-spoken, and people are waiting for him to say something rude or self-righteous and they hate him for not doing it.
A guy told me he hates Tebow cause he’s constantly in people’s face about his faith. I don’t think so at all; I think the guy is open to sharing it, and showing support for causes he believes in.
He said to me: “What do you know about Phillip Rivers, personally?”
me: “he’s family man who has a lot of kids and came from a football family.”
him: “you didn’t know he was a hardcore Catholic though, right?.”
me: “no, I didn’t.”
him: “that’s because he doesn’t shove it in your face.”
I’m a bit of a closet Tebow fan myself. I’m born a Hindu, but Tebow’s public profession of his Christian faith doesn’t bother me a bit, although it can be a bit of a distraction. I like the kid. He’s focused, sincere, intense, and loves the game. Most of all, he’s a great team leader. There is more to a QB than just throwing the ball. That’s why Rivers will be watching the play-offs from his couch.
Tebow doesn't shove it in anyone's face more than any other player that says, "And thanks to God" ... or whatever.
I don’t get that either… or why it would curve someone’s perception. He was a little more outspoken when he first came in than the average player who does it, but since has toned it down A LOT.
Hundreds of players week in and week out, say their thanks to God… nobody criticizes those guys.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I think the abortion commerical
started it all; people were put off by it (I didn’t care). The media didn’t let it seep out of our consciousness. Abortion — religion — Christianity was forever attached to Tebow’s image.
I dunno man, he starts every interview by saying, "First and foremost, I would like to thank my lord and saviour Jesus Christ."
I wouldn’t consider that “toning down”.
"I believe in you guys in the media. I believe that you will find a way to doubt this team. Just as long as what's written is written against us we'll be happy." - Jim Harbaugh
by SanFranciscoKnights on Dec 31, 2011 1:39 AM PST up reply actions
I think I have seen other players say that before. In fact, Reggie White “The Minister of Defense” was quite outspoken in his pregame and postgame interviews about his beliefs. He never received this much flack.
I think at the beginning of his career, and even before that he rubbed a lot of people the wrong way with a lot of his comments and actions. Now, I think he is a lot more similar to the average player that praises God when they have the chance.
Perception goes a long way and he already had done the damage to affect people’s view of him. It’s sort of the same as Alex Smith. Had this year been Alex’s rookie season, everyone would be excited and ecstatic about the potential. But he has built that perception already.
I think if Tebow continues to jus be normal about it, as I believe he has, then eventually it will be a non-issue.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I agree
Tebow isn’t in anyone’s face about much of anything. Plenty of professional athletes say just as many religious things in interviews and such (Gore and Willis come to mind because they are much more visible).
If anything the media is responsible for this kind of thinking, they are the one’s putting more of that stuff out about Tebow than he is…a lot more.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
All I have to say is THIS...
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d82563c0a/Crabtree-s-41-yard-catch
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
Honestly,
It represents everything Smith is about. He’s getting pressured pretty quick, the pocket collapses, he has to almost throw it off his back foot, but he follows through just enough to get something on it. There’s a guys hand in his face and his lineman are almost backing into him. Our special teams had just had a punt blocked, and our defense had just given up its only rushing touchdown all year. We were down by one point to our hated rivals in THEIR stadium. Then Braylon gets called for a penalty, erasing most of the 15 yards we gained due to the illegal hit that crushed Williams. We had just rushed the ball for two yards and it was 2nd and 18.
Remember against Arizona? Who was the guy scrambling around like a mad man trying to win us the game any way he could, and who made a throw that was catchable that would have got us the first down? And against Baltimore, who was the guy who made a great throw, also for the first down, that was also dropped.
And against Seattle, who made an amazing, deep, sideline throw to Crabtree that WAS caught and that helped us win the game?
Alex Smith. The guy has no quit in him. No fear. “No flinch”, as Harbaugh says. That throw to Crabtree… not enough can be said about it, in my opinion. It epitomizes Alex Smith’s guts.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
What makes you think or actually believe that?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Right, because there is ZERO context related to all situations.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I think he can. I think he will.
He’s completed deep sideline throws already this year. It will happen more as time goes on, in my opinion.
I do agree with what you said earlier, he is playing for an ultra-conservative coach. But when Alex has been asked to win us game with his arm, I think he has. He’s made the plays.
Right now he is missing a lot of his sideline throws deep and to the outside, which seems to be a calculated decision, “If I miss, I’ll miss wide.” For all we know Harbaugh has instilled that into him. Much like the early-season high throws to Crabtree, it was consistent, so it wasn’t an accuracy thing, it was a “this is happening on purpose for some reason” thing."
Alex and Crabtree eventually fixed that issue. He’s been throwing to Crabtree great now, and their chemistry gets better every week.
I expect more successful, deep throws to Crabs as time goes on.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
I actually agree with this.
I mean, I understand wanting to be conservative, but we are SO FREAKIN’ CONSERVATIVE. It’s ridiculous.
We’re going to lose a game in the playoffs by 3 points because somewhere early in the 4th quarter we ran three draw plays up the gut after a holding penalty or false start backed us up and Harbaugh didn’t wanna risk going for the 15 or 20 yards needed to get it back.
Or, hell, even if its first and 10, we’ll run three run plays. Crazy conservative play-calling.
Against Seattle, we had them on their HEELS after that Smith throw to Crabtree. That’s when you call ANOTHER pass play and bury them. Right then. Right there. Get a touchdown. Put your foot on their neck and finish ’em off.
But Harbaugh plays very conservative.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
by liberty_JAC on Dec 30, 2011 4:24 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
we'll be holding
a 3 pt lead with the ball and decide to settle for 3, or flat out punt it, so the opponent with 2 minutes left because our defense is sooooo good. And then we’ll get burnt because we’re playing the Saints or Lions. That’s the kind of garbage I saw happening much of this year.
Never SETTLE for giving the opponent the last possession of a game when you are up by less than 7.
Yep. That's my worst fear right now.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
It's been my fear all year
this hyper-conservative BS of constantly flushing the game towards the defense and just pinning everything on their backs. On offense, YOU are the aggressor and the defense must react. You have more control. It’s also bad strategy becasue late in games, the trailing team naturally has an ability to be more successful…because it’s 4 down territory everywhere late in games, especially on last drives.
And then we’ll get burnt because we’re playing the Saints or Lions.
Because…. you know… we didn’t already beat the Lions at their house or anything like that.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Hell we could have run a PA or even a delayed draw to Hunter
Instead we went up the gut. It’s like Sing and Raye’s ghost haunt they playbooth.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 6:01 PM PST up reply actions
The refs missing an offensive PI on Crabs…at least according to Pete Carroll. Not real sure where that came from at all, there’s almost no contact at all.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
Yah, that's just sour grapes from Carroll.
What I see is very tight coverage, and a very good throw and a very good catch.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
Pete Carroll is SOOOOO full of it.
I saw the post game interview, and he was crying more than I have seen any coach in the history of the NFL cry about how the game was called. He was acting like the refs robbed them.
And then he really pissed me off when he was talking about how the Kyle Williams thing was the worst call in the history of the NFL. He said that Williams was getting back up to run the ball. Don’t know if he watched the replay but he clearly and obviously gave himself up. He even made a gesture like “damn I wish I wouldn’t have slipped” before he got drilled in the head.
This, furthering my perception of the biggest douchebag coach in the NFL. And yes, I feel like he is a bigger moron than even Jim Schwartz.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Totally. Screw Pete Carroll.
Guy was classless at USC, ran a corrupt program and then jumped ship to the NFL before the whole thing sank. Harbaugh continues to upstage Carroll every time they meet. Carroll is most definitely FULL OF IT.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
It was the most classless, unsportsman like, thing I have ever heard a coach say... the thing about Kyle Williams.
And their fans chanting when there was clearly and injury on the field… doctors running in left and right and then their fans start chanting the team name? That’s as classless and despicable as it gets in pro sports.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
by Drew Kerr on Dec 30, 2011 4:36 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
yeah
Carroll is an A HOLE because Seattle fans cheered an injury. It’s not even a big deal. The same classless stuff happens among invidiuals and groups of niner fans and all team fans.
Really? When?
When have Niners fans ever chanted the team name when we’ve injured another player?
Pretty sure the answer is: NEVER
And the fan base is obviously a reflection of the douchiness of their coach. Pretty shameless and idiotic.
But go ahead, keep batting for the other team… you’re batting 1.000 so far…
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And the fan base is obviously a reflection of the douchiness of their coach. Pretty shameless and idiotic.
Greatest statement ever. Fans, who have been there for decades, reflect their coach who has BEEN THERE FOR THREE YEARS…/ Teams can reflect the personality of the coach, but Fans never do, for obvious reasons that aren’t so obvious to you.
I the great words of Howard Cosell:
“I’m just telling it like it is.”
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I would agree in that Harbaugh may come off as arrogant sometimes, but he is not obnoxious or self-entitled… he still shows humility at times… neither of which Schwartz or Carroll EVER do.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
lots of non niner
and non stanford fans would disagree with you.
Everyone shows humility sometimes, and so often in front of the camera, it’s BS.
Go get them… have ’em sign a petition or something.
Carroll and Schwartz are classless pieces of garbage and yet, salary_cap prefers them more than the team he supposedly supports coach? Something fishy about that for sure.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I just never had a problem
staying away from self-righteous favoring of a coach/player on my team while self-righteously bashing someone else who does lots of the same things my guy says or does. I have no problem calling Harbaugh kind of a pompous crazy man. He is. Some of it is good for the football team.
That's your slanted perception I guess.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Screw non-niner and non Stanford fans.
Screw them from behind.
I think Schwartz is a bigger d-bag, one because he is, and two simply because Carroll’s antics are just comical to me at this point. They don’t really bother me anymore, I’m just like, ‘oh look Carroll did/said something else stupid.’
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
Carroll is the most
likeable of the three, just in terms of people skills, etc. That’s why Carrol is a great fit for the college game.
Nah
You don’t know how any of their people skills are really. Unless you are basing it off interactions with the media, which isn’t really indicative of much except their feelings toward the media…
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
Harbaugh isn't.
But it comes as no surprise coming from you.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
nobody on the niners can
ever be douche bags I guess. The Lions game mid-feild handshake was a great example of one douche being an unware, pompous crazy man and the other responding to said behavior in a douchy, pompous, self-righteous egotistical manner.
That was very calculated. Harbaugh didn’t do that to any coach before that…Except Carroll back in college.
There are numerous videos of Schwartz acting like a clown up and down the sideline during games, very Carroll-esque.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
if it was calculated
he’s even more of a pompous douche bag, or something worse than that.
Niner fans are trying to make other rival coaches seem far worse than their own? How strange…
Context...
Schwartz earned it… but think what you will.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
A simple hard handshake is being a pompous douchbag more than running up and down the sideline, yelling across the sideline at the other coach, and chasing him down the field after a loss?
Alright…
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
You are contradicting yourself.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
no
I’m saying this arguement is stupid. This is a debate on who is more of a douche bag. I’ve been trying to say they are all douchy in some respect and that saying one is way more douchy than the other reaks of idiocy. I mean, you are propping up your guy by pointing out the other guy’s antics. All three are arrogant bastards, it’s almost like you have to be one to be good in this league, I don’t know. This is not suprising; this goes on everywhere in the sports world.
Nah, wasn't propping up anyone.
Harbaugh is quite an arrogant bastard at times, but it is mostly toward the media.
Attack this day with an enthusiasm unknown to mankind. ~ Jack Harbaugh
That "hand shake" was not an accident...
And it was earned by Schwartz from his douche bag antics earlier in the game… and going back even further to the owners meeting during the lockout.
But let him think what he’d like to. It’s not gonna change his warped view.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Butthurt is very strong with the Seahawks.
It flows through them… gives them strength..
Tebow
Is all Triceps. Hence the hitch in his throw, it weighs down his throwing motion, lol
by tombowski02 on Dec 30, 2011 4:37 PM PST via mobile reply actions
I have to laugh at the title of this article.. Calling someone an Idiot..
I would get a stiff warning for calling someone the same here on here..lol
I’m not complaining or anything just pointing it out..
"You have to reinvent yourself each year, ... What helped us was that there was some turnover each year." Bill Walsh...
I know rite , I got one last week for saying , dang it was so non- trivial i can't remember what it was .... !!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
So be truthful, more than likely, these are the NFC playoff Q.B.'s
SF – Alex
G.B.- Rogers
N.O.- Brees
Det-
Atl – Ryan
N.Y.-Manning
Grade them A to F
none of them can get a F, can they?
Since grades are terrible and, what about tiers?:
A) Rodgers, Brees
B) Manning, Stafford
C) Ryan, Smith
or 1A) Rodgers 1B) Brees 3) Manning 4) Stafford 5) Ryan 6) Smith
Rodgers – A
Brees – A
Manning – A
Stafford – B
Smith – B
Ryan – B
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I wonder if there is anybody
IN football who feels Smith is on par with Stafford. Even if you take away the age difference, I don’t know a sober person who would go forward with Smith over Stafford. Besides that, Stafford is 23 years old in his first full season healthy!!!!
Pretend you are a Lions fan…then what would you think?
I don’t pretend… and Stafford has screwed them out of some wins this year by making some pretty stupid throws…. Smith has not. Smith has five 4th quarter comebacks this year, so yeah…
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
*Four of which were done on the road in hostile environments
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/comeback.cgi?player=SmitAl03
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
we've discussed the context of 4th quarter comebacks
and how ridiculous that stat is. I believe anytime you take the lead in the 4th quarter — and don’t surrender it — it couts as one, which we all know is dubious.
Stafford has hurt the team with INTs this year. He’s also won a lot of games by himself because he doesn’t have a lights out defense. Even with his INTs he is better than SMith. He can actually make plays. Short and long. You think the NIners are better now with Smith over Stafford? For the next 10 years, you choose Smith over Stafford?
That's just about a lame of explanation as I think I have ever read on here.
Do you refute anything here? Nope.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I refuted your 4th Qtr
comeback scenario. He got one for beating the Giants. the Niners had a two score lead with 12 minutes left.
Do you like the Niners offensive capabilities right now? Is it your preference that it stay the same?
No you didn't. You just think you did.
Break down and give specific examples in each game as to WHY you don’t think Smith was responsible for those wins… or at least played a MAJOR role in them.
If you can’t, and provide generics as you did above again, then your stance is unsubstantial, null and void.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
It's also has merit in accordance to the I Ching symbolism's ...!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
This ... !!
Rodgers – A
Brees – A
Manning – B
Smith – B
Stafford – B
Ryan – C
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
Well , he a Seahawks fan what do you espect ...!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
Gore is not a top 5 back for sure and is only arguably a top 10 back
Crabs is a top 20 receiver I’d say and VD would be a top 3 TE if he didn’t drop anything he has to catch over his shoulder. As it is that weakness makes him a top 5-7 TE
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Dec 30, 2011 6:08 PM PST up reply actions
Well , that would be a hodge podge of mixtures of numerous combo's , each Qb has a good mix that suits his system ...
… Brees prolly has the best of those three positions …!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
Rec'd
for the exceptional writing, both witty and insightful.
by Waiting4JoshMorgan on Dec 30, 2011 5:34 PM PST reply actions
So...who would be the right backup for Alex, then?
It’s apparent that some on this board do not trust Kaepernick as the No. 2 and are openly advocating for a vet. So, I’ll just throw it out for discussion, since we have a week (at least) before our playoff opener:
Who is available RIGHT NOW that you would trust to lead this team if Alex went down? Please explain why that QB would be the ideal backup – attributes, intangibles, experience, etc., and why we should trust that person when other teams apparently aren’t.
Just as an aside, I don’t remember much criticism of Walsh for carrying Guy Benjamin as his only backup in 1981. Sure, he had more NFL experience than Kaepernick (9 games with the Dolphins and Saints over 3 years), but would you really have trusted him to start and win a playoff game if Montana had been injured? I doubt it.
Fair point.
I’ve never advocated for Smith as the long-term No. 1 myself. I still think of him as Harbaugh’s Steve DeBerg…short-term solution at best.
As I said, though, this is about the backup slot. If this is someone who is DEFINITELY better than Alex and could hold the fort until Kaepernick is ready, then all the better. But I don’t believe there’s anyone available right now who fits that description.
Wow. That Pearlman piece should be burned. Or since it's digital.. deleted.
And for the record: Smith has been routinely making sideline throws accurately all year long (in fact, he has shown the 10-15 yard “out” to be a strength). The ones he misses are downfield (20+) throws (fly, fade, wheel, etc.) and a lot of that has to to with erring on the side of caution (i.e. my guy catches it or it sails out of bounds).
But anyway, Smith may not be spectacular, but he has been very good this year. “Crap” players don’t lead teams do a dozen wins or stay in the top-10 in QB rating the duration of the year. If that is “crap,” sign me up for a whole lot of toilets.
Jim Harbaugh AND Alex Smith are our future!
SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS: WORLD CHAMPIONS!
Touchdown Forty Niners!
Giants Baseball: Torture. It hurts so good.

by 









































