Posted: 2/13/2013 3:48 PM
Posted: 2/13/2013 4:33 PM
Posted: 2/13/2013 11:33 PM
JH360 wrote: Speaking of illogical analysis...."The coaching staff made him good. If that's true, than Harbaugh can make any QB good. That would be magical! Or conversely, Harbaugh is the ONLY coaching staff good enough to make Smith any good." What is this nonsense? A great system can't make a guy look better then he is? Smith was an absolute bust for 6 seasons before Harbaugh came on. Then he became "good".Let's instead compare Smith to Flacco. Or Brady? Or Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger, Manning (coming off a career threatening neck), E.Manning, Ryan, Stafford, Luck, Griffin.... Let's aim a little higher then Alex Smith or Chase Daniel.But for the sake of argument, let's compare him to Weeden. The difference is 7 seasons of experience and a bigger paycheck. That's about it. It's a lateral move that doesn't make the team that much better. And that's making a big assumption that Smith can play like he played in Harbaugh's system rather then the way he played in his previous 5 systems under some very good coaches.
Posted: 2/14/2013 2:15 AM
Posted: 2/14/2013 9:34 AM
gomjabber wrote: Look, I'm not even making an argument that Smith is a sure thing. Just that to dismiss him out of hand is to deny both eye test and W-L stats. I don't buy the theory that only an uber QB can take a team all the way. I look at the Browns and I see a 5-11 team with a big question mark at QB, and I read a lot of static about how it spoil Weeden to bring in some competition. Never know, some competition might make Weeden better. Or make the team better.Your POV on this makes sense, and I haven't disagreed with an F'N word you've written. I don't get this resistance to Smith. WTF is wrong with him? Oh yeah, he doesn't fit the scheme. You know, the whole vertical passing attack thing. But Weeden, he does. If it wasn't for the dunderheaded Hanoi Hilton prisoner (AA, 2012) pigeonholing him into that archaic 1993 offense, he would have set the league on fire.Weeden has some tools, he might even be good. But giving him more or less a pass due to "scheme" while mercilessly excoriating McCoy who played in the same **** "scheme" is revealing. But Weeden, he's got that cannon.Sometimes you gotta use your eyeballs. For all the sophistication of the modern game, it still gets down to the plays drawn up in the sand when you played as a little kid. Throw the ball to the open man. It's like the idiots that argued here about the trajectory and this and that and the other when Dilfer overthrew a wide open BE by like 20 ft.It doesn't matter what the "scheme" is, you just make plays. Weeden missed wide open guys enough to warrant serious concern. Miight be fixable. Field General? Not so much. And he slides too soon like a wuss.Anyway back to Smith, I never knew he existed until is name came up a while back, I did a quick check and saw the 17/5 stat line from the year before. 5 F'n picks in 445 attempts? Then I watched, I guess it was the divisional playoff game, where Smith pulled out a thriller by repeatedly willing the team down the field in the 4th quarter, sheer brilliance.I guess his play in the championship game was less winsome, yet he still finished the postseason at 5/0. Not too shabby, and this year he was putting up numbers a Browns fan could only morosely whiff at before getting hurt and then having tropical storm Kaepernick flatten him and everything else in its path.So yeah, while he's had some lean years, I'd say he's probably qualified to come push a rookie on a 5-11 laughingstock called the Cleveland Browns.Not too worried about the "scheme" I'm sure Smith could adapt, and he probably can spin it a little faster than he's being credited for.Bring him in and let them fight it out, works for me. But no high draft picks, that would be tough to stomach.
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:32 AM
Last edited 2/14/2013 11:14 AM by HeadHole
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:50 AM
Gameface64 wrote: Okay, and how many Offensive Co-ordinators did Smith have so far in his career. I believe that it's 6 in 7 years or something like that."
Gameface64 wrote:And yes, let's compare Smith to Flacco. The last two years there's been tons of opinion posted about Flacco that mirrors your low opinion of Smith, which is that he was over-rated and not good enough to win a SB."
Gameface64 wrote:Look, I'm not even making an argument that Smith is a sure thing. Just that to dismiss him out of hand is to deny both eye test and W-L stats."
gomjabber wrote:"Anyway back to Smith, I never knew he existed until is name came up a while back""Sometimes you gotta use your eyeballs."
Last edited 2/14/2013 1:25 PM by JH360
Posted: 2/14/2013 2:06 PM
Last edited 2/14/2013 3:17 PM by HeadHole
Posted: 2/14/2013 5:38 PM
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:25 PM
JH360 wrote:Your eye test and W-L stats are denying the 6 years before Harbaugh. Even while having his two best seasons under him, his coach chose to try and replace him each season.
Posted: 2/14/2013 10:36 PM
HeadHole wrote: "Good advice."-- Well, posters are welcome to use their eyeballs or any other body part to analyze Smith or any other player.Really good advice would be to watch what the Browns do as they are led by a new regime and are at least partially advised by an OC who has worked with Smith in a real football situation and is so informed. Of course, their view of Weeden and what they would need to give up to get Smith also plays a role in their decisions. Just please don't let any concern over Weeden's delicate nature be a factor. If he or any other players are real sensitive, maybe they should pursue other interests.So, if someone just wants to show the forum how smart they are, the good advice- as you say- would be to "use your eyeballs" and fire away. If you want to see what the team actually does, stand by. BTW- The price for Smith might be too high. There are other teams who could compete and drive the price higher and there is a consideration in SF that the depth at QB that Smith brings isn't a bad thing. So that would drive up any price for him. On the other hand, if SF keeps him, they will have to pay him money in April. Supply and demand always effects prices. Money- not a player's feelings- is a more substantive factor.Further BTW- Apparently if the 49ers decided to keep Smith this year, they would get a low 3rd round pick as compensation if he goes FA in 2014 and gets signed by a team. Worst case if they keep him and pay his salary: they have QB depth and end up with a 3rd rounder down the road. So their is support for a belief that a 3rd round pick would be the lowest point they would negotiate from. Begin your auction at that price and the best offer wins!2013 may well be a Weeden Year for the Browns no matter what.
Last edited 2/14/2013 10:37 PM by Gameface64
Posted: 2/14/2013 11:48 PM
Gameface64 wrote: I don't believe Harbaugh tried to replace Smith until Kaepernick was ripe. And Kaepernick is an anomaly. If we have a Kaerpernick, let me know. So it's irrelevant that Smith was replaced by CK, because we're talking about Smith vs. Weeden. And one more time, if Smith was so bad, why was there any controversy around Kaepernick replacing him?
Gameface64 wrote: Granted he's not Kaepernick, but right now who is? I can't think of a young QB that I'd rather have, although Luck may eventually prove to be even better. And knowing that Kapernick was not considered the top QB in his draft class shows that great QBs can come from nowhere.
Last edited 2/14/2013 11:50 PM by JH360
Posted: 2/15/2013 12:30 AM
Last edited 2/15/2013 12:29 PM by gomjabber
Posted: 2/15/2013 8:33 AM
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:26 AM
redright wrote: HH,Smith has ups and downs. In some ways he contrasts with Weeden as he contrasted with Colin.RR, I agree. That is why I don't see him as a good sign.1. He has his ups and downs2. He contrasts. Why not get all your ducks in a row? Weeden, Moore, D. A. or go the other way, Smith, McCoy and Lewis? FWIW, I read Chud and Turner wanting a down-field, play acton offense. Smith, and McCoy and Lewis seem to be a better Holmgren/Shurmur WCO fit, or whatever that supposed offense was expected to be.Furthur, If Smith comes in there is no competition. Two different QBs in style and approach. Smith coming in means Weeds is gone. I am okay with Weeds moving on, IF, Turner and Chud deem him not capable of starting QB status and really want to run an offense unlike what the have said.
Posted: 2/15/2013 11:28 AM
Posted: 2/15/2013 12:19 PM
Posted: 2/15/2013 12:38 PM
Posted: 2/15/2013 9:36 PM
JH360 wrote: Gameface64 wrote: I don't believe Harbaugh tried to replace Smith until Kaepernick was ripe. And Kaepernick is an anomaly. If we have a Kaerpernick, let me know. So it's irrelevant that Smith was replaced by CK, because we're talking about Smith vs. Weeden. And one more time, if Smith was so bad, why was there any controversy around Kaepernick replacing him? Harbaugh tried to replace Smith with a questionably healthy Peyton Manning before the season as well, don't forget. It's not irrelevant that the coach that helped him play better then he ever had, still actively tried to replace him-and eventually did. It should tell you something about his talent level relative to other good QBs.The controversy was because of how it was done. Is that so hard to see? Their winning games, Smith's managing it up, and he stayed with a completely unproven young guy. Gameface64 wrote: Granted he's not Kaepernick, but right now who is? I can't think of a young QB that I'd rather have, although Luck may eventually prove to be even better. And knowing that Kapernick was not considered the top QB in his draft class shows that great QBs can come from nowhere. ^Here's the problem. When did Kaepernick become the best QB in the league? Kap is a good young QB-that's all. Smith is a so-so vet. We need to be looking for a good young QB.