Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith! Or Not!! (M.E.T.) NO kirk talk---that goes in ATN forum

[Sandy Monk]

I think Alex has shown over the years that he will be as good as the team around him is. If they are all broken and collapsing in suck around him, then he won't carry you, as we now agree no QBs really do. If the team is decent to good around him, then expect to have winning seasons and a playoff shot. 

 

So again, it's time better invested to focus on the areas of concern. Just one guy's opinion. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

24 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

I have my serious doubts that anyone here has actually been watching Smith play for over a decade.

 

Believe it or not, many of us are fans of the NFL in general, whether it be love of the game, fantasy football, both or many other reasons.

 

What is interesting about Alex Smith though is that bobandweave sparked the Alex Smith debate prior to the team ever being rumored to look at him.  If anything, even my own opinion on Smith is better than it was prior to signing him.  We’d have to dig through the weeds to find that debate but I recall B&W being on somewhat of an island with his Alex Smith fandom.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

25 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Believe it or not, many of us are fans of the NFL in general, whether it be love of the game, fantasy football, both or many other reasons.

 

What is interesting about Alex Smith though is that bobandweave sparked the Alex Smith debate prior to the team ever being rumored to look at him.  If anything, even my own opinion on Smith is better than it was prior to signing him.  We’d have to dig through the weeds to find that debate but I recall B&W being on somewhat of an island with his Alex Smith fandom.

 

The analysis about Smith since the trade has been so superficial, it's hard for me to believe it's based on 10+ years of observation.

[Skinsinparadise]

24 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

I know you have probably been over this a million times, but if you could indulge me, why is it that you feel the team is not ready to compete for the gold? They won 7 games with an obliterated starting unit. If better health occurs, why the heck can they not win 9 or 10 and maybe be hot in the postseason?

 

Sure, it's a tough conference and division, but I just don't get the unwillingness in giving them a chance, at this stage of the season. It just feels like there's something unspoken going on here. I don't know that there is, but this is what and why I touched on it earlier. 

 

Cliff notes:

A. Weak running game

B. Passing weapons injury prone

C. Competition within the division and the NFC in general

D. Tough schedule.  

E.  I don't buy a law of averages argument when it comes to guys coming off of injury being less likely to be injured again.  Case in point with Chris Thompson saying he was told he'd be 100% in nov. 

 

I like the roster.  It has potential.  But I don't think its a threat to go to the big dance but a threat to squeeze into the playoffs at best.  I'd be more optimistic if Guice was healthy who I think would have turned around the running game.

 

I go way back with rosy expectations where I imagine scenarios where every positive expectations comes true. I've just settled down from that over the years.  And I still love the draft, its like a religion for me, my favorite thread here is the draft thread by a mile. Lets take the 2011 draft.  Did you see Hankerson in the senior bowl game, see him against Miami during the season -- the dude is going to be a beast.  Helu and Royster -- Helu brings speed and good hands and Royster led Penn State in yards going way back to some of the greats, what finds!   Jarvis Jenkins is unblockable in practice.  Redskins solve their safety problem by getting Phillip Thomas and Rambo.  Heck some draft geeks had Rambo as a 2nd rounder, we got him in the 6th!

 

I am a football junkie as much as anyone here.  I've read and watched a lot about just about every pick we pick.  i can sell how every pick ends up a gem.  But over the years, things tend to average out -- all your picks do not end up gems where the most optimistic take about each bears fruit.  In some cases, yes and in some cases no.  If you get 3 starters out of a draft, you did good. 

 

But when people get preachy to me about it, I am not moved.  It's not that I don't understand their point.  It's not hard for me to paint every scenario as going down best case.  But look every other team has their camp stories, their finds, their narratives.  It's not unique to just here.  And for me to be sold on something -- for me at least show me what you mean with some substance -- as opposed to give me a story that I am already familiar with.  

 

Case in point, Volsmet on a thread was selling Da'ron Payne.  He was more sold on him than anyone.  He showed clip after clip. He put in a lot of time.  It was good stuff.  I even discussed some specific games with him.  That to me was interesting.  I told him I appreciated his optimism.  And I did.  I loved that enthusiasm and he backed it with some real meat.  But otherwise if its just people selling a narrative that is just tied to a what if positive scenario -- it doesn't move me once I've made up my mind after digesting all the narratives out there.  For me to change, you have to show me.  People don't have to show me.  But just explaining my mindset.

 

Heck I can recall like yesterday being on a plane reading a SI article about Heath Shuler.  The article basically talked about how mobile Shuler is and it quoted people saying the dude is going to be Norv's next Troy Aikman.  In retrospect that's ridiculous. But at the time, the narrative to me came off very believable.  Heck I can remember just about every narrative - how Westbrook will be the next Michael Irvin on and on.

 

And none of that means I don't like the draft -- I still love the draft but I don't fall head over heels over every story.  Or look at every potential upside on every player as a fact that's just going to come true.  I am not saying you are on the other side of any of these points.  i am just explaining my mindset when I judge a roster.  And I actually consider myself in the optimism camp if anything.  I typically predict good years and wins almost every week.  But if the idea is for me to buy into every player and every best case scenario -- then I am going to disappoint and irritate the few people who do see the roster that way.  Even though I can relate to that mindset from past experience. 

 

And the other thing I don't think this team's management has turned over a new leaf from the past (albeit some things have improved) until Bruce is reassigned out of personnel.  It's great that they emphasize the draft more but to me that's not the only thing about management that matters. I can tell that this point irritates some (not all) of those same people.  And they think my non-completely rosy expectation about every scenario is seated in my take about Bruce.  But it actually isn't.  I don't like Bruce.  But my measured take on some players and scenes have nothing to do with him -- its just what I feel about the NFL in general.   Hence we got some heated arguments cooking.  Typically from the same people on both sides of this debate.    

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

11 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

The analysis about Smith since the trade has been so superficial, it's hard for me to believe it's based on 10+ years of observation.

 

I doubt anyone has watched every snap of Alex Smith play, but it’s hard to be an NFL fan and not be familiar with Alex Smith.

 

When the trade occurred, most people wanted to light Ashburn on fire.  I recall the night vividly.  Excitement was shared by very few.  Most fans were like ‘WTF, did we really just trade assets for another Andy Reid hand me down?’.  Over time, many fans have changed their tune.

[Sandy Monk]

Appreciate the time put into the response SIP. 

 

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I like the roster.  It has potential.  But I don't think its a threat to go to the big dance but a threat to squeeze into the playoffs at best.  I'd be more optimistic if Guice was healthy who I think would have turned around the running game.

 

 

I think this is the most interesting part to this. I too am an experience forum/draft nut, and am not a wild zealot over prospects or Super Bowls. I think it an immense challenge to expect the team will be some unstoppable force that obliterates a path to SB glory. Now that said, if I regard any team as potentially playoff worthy, then I give that team as much a chance to win it all as any team, sans NE.  

 

It's all about getting hot at the right time, and it really doesn't cost more to put the faith in. So I think my other curiosity is this. If people are so deflated already (not you), and feeling like the season isn't going to go anywhere, why the need to come onto a fan forum and try depressing the joy out of the ones that are still excited for the season? It's just a small pet peeve though, whatever. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

11 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

I doubt anyone has watched every snap of Alex Smith play, but it’s hard to be an NFL fan and not be familiar with Alex Smith.

 

When the trade occurred, most people wanted to light Ashburn on fire.  I recall the night vividly.  Excitement was shared by very few.  Most fans were like ‘WTF, did we really just trade assets for another Andy Reid hand me down?’.  Over time, many fans have changed their tune.

 

To me, "familiar with Alex Smith" = conventional wisdom about Alex Smith (not saying that's how you meant it).

 

So I see most who are "familiar with Alex Smith" as having a general passing knowledge of his perception, which is hard to shake without actually watching him from game to game, season to season. Which (again) I have serious doubts too many here have done to any real degree. I've seen the superficial analysis we give of our own players that we do follow lol...

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

4 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

To me, "familiar with Alex Smith" = conventional wisdom about Alex Smith (not saying that's how you meant it).

 

So I see most who are "familiar with Alex Smith" as having a general passing knowledge of his perception, which is hard to shake without actually watching him from game to game, season to season. Which (again) I have serious doubts too many here have done to any real degree. I've seen the superficial analysis we give of our own players that we do follow lol...

 

He’s a former #1 draft pick with 13 seasons under his belt.  That’s plenty of time to see enough of him combined with stats to build an opinion on him.

 

Not to mention plenty of articles written by folks that actually do analyze each and every snap.

 

 

 

 

 

[NoCalMike]

Much of Alex Smith's reputation is based on two things.  The first chunk of his career where he was on some awful teams, had a new O-coordinator every year and then secondly, the fact that the when the 49ers finally turned it around they were known as a defensive/run-first team.   This left the permanent mark on Alex Smith as a "game manager/just don't screw things up" type QB. That was exacerbated by Harbaugh stepping over his injured body Don King style to anoint Colin Kaepernick the starting QB when it was really Alex Smith that helped get that team to where they were going into 2013.

 

Again, I will re-iterate that I don't view Alex Smith as some kind of savior QB that is going to come in here and single-handedly transform this franchise into something the roster isn't ready to do, however I do think the roster overall has improved (even with the loss of Guice) and that will benefit Smith as it would have benefit Cousins if he was still here as well.

 

Seems that overall, practice sessions are a better indication of who will make the team. Preseason games are more like a cherry on top and more a way for players to get their game legs under them in preparation for the real thing. 

[bobandweave]

QBs are polarizing figures, some like them and some don’t. It sucks when people disagree about them. 

 

Anyone pretending that Alex Smith is just a checkdown QB ala Brad Johnson they have no clue as to Smiths game. Like the guy who had an issue with me being impressed with his first drive as a Redskin. Those folks discredit what Alex did with Kansas City and say incorrect things like those teams only won because of its Defense last year or Tyreek Hill.

 

Truth is the Chiefs Defense last year was worse than ours. The Chiefs defense ranked 28th in yards allowed and yards allowed per game given up. The Redskins last year were better than that.   

 

Alex Smith compared to Cousins in 2017 had only fifty one fewer passing yard then Kirk for the entire season (4093 vs 4042 and Smith had more if you count the playoffs or consider that Alex sat game 17 so Pat Mahomes could get a start), Alex threw one less TD then Kirk last season (28 to 27), but what really separated the two is Alex was number one in the league for passer rating compared to Kirk’s number 12 rating and Alex threw 5 INTs to Kirk’s 13, and that Alex passed for more yards per game then Kirk did. When you say that its going to upset some posters but that's the truth. Some just want to say all Alex is is some check down QB and discredit him. 

 

Some just aren’t willing to give Alex a fair shake and have already made up their minds about this. I wish they would give him a chance. 

 

The reason I was pushing for Alex when Kirk was here before the trade was announced wasn’t because I’m a fanboy of Alex Smith. I respect Alex Smith's game. His resume is impressive. He went to a 2 win team the year before and then won them three division titles and 50 games in the next five seasons he played for the Chiefs. What is not to like about that? 

 

He was first overall pick in the draft. What’s not to like about that?

 

He is one of the top QBs in the game today. What's not to like about that?

 

Alex imo is just a better QB than Kirk Cousins. He wasn't going to cost as much as Kirk, and having him over Kirk made it clear he was leaving us was the best thing to do. It happens that the team agreed with me about this. Stats are in Alex’s favor over Kirk's but also what stands out is Alex's ability to win football games. If Andy Reid is the only reason for Alex having success why then did Alex have success on the 49ers team before he was on the Chiefs? Why did Andy Reid even want Alex Smith if Alex Smith was just some checkdown Charlie? Truth is in his last full season starting in San Fran he led them to a 13-3 record. Andy wasn't a part of that. 

 

None of the criticisms against Alex hold up imo and are just rehashed crap like NCM just posted. Alex gives them a better chance to win games imo then what we lost. I just wish everyone gave Alex a chance before writing him off

[Sandy Monk]

I really don't see the need to or encourage comments like that, b@w.

 

Quote

Alex imo is just a better QB then Kirk. 

 

You should be able to say it on a Redskins forum, yes, but you have to know it's just going to piss some people off and make them dislike Smith all the more. Sad, but people really are that reactionary and impressionable. 

 

Right or wrong, just maybe try to keep it a little lower key, and don't compare the former QB. It's hard enough for people to let go. Smith may be a better fit in terms of mobility and turnovers, but they are both good QBs that can win if their team doesn't suck. I'm good with leaving it at that, you know? 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

24 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

I really don't see the need to or encourage comments like that, b@w.

 

 

You should be able to say it on a Redskins forum, yes, but you have to know it's just going to piss some people off and make them dislike Smith all the more. Sad, but people really are that reactionary and impressionable. 

 

Right or wrong, just maybe try to keep it a little lower key, and don't compare the former QB. It's hard enough for people to let go. Smith may be a better fit in terms of mobility and turnovers, but they are both good QBs that can win if their team doesn't suck. I'm good with leaving it at that, you know? 

 

Here you go, giving people lessons about how to post on the forum.  With all due respect B&W is probably the biggest Alex Smith fan and one of the self admittingly biggest Cousins haters on the forum. He actually called for the Alex Smith trade before it was even a thought.

 

Plenty of folks have said that Alex is a better QB than Kirk.  They are still alive.  

 

You want to keep making it out that the folks who aren’t doing jumping jacks over Alex before he’s ever played a snap for the Skins is all due to the fact that they like Cousins.  As if we all loved Smith prior to him becoming a Redskin, which just isn’t true.  If you can find it, go back and find the original trade for Smith thread and see the initial reaction by most of the fan base.  It wasn’t good.

[bobandweave]

13 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

I really don't see the need to or encourage comments like that, b@w.

 

 

You should be able to say it on a Redskins forum, yes, but you have to know it's just going to piss some people off and make them dislike Smith all the more. Sad, but people really are that reactionary and impressionable. 

 

Right or wrong, just maybe try to keep it a little lower key, and don't compare the former QB. It's hard enough for people to let go. Smith may be a better fit in terms of mobility and turnovers, but they are both good QBs that can win if their team doesn't suck. I'm good with leaving it at that, you know? 

 

Why is it that I shouldn't say that Alex Smith is better than Kirk Cousins? I don't mean to piss anyone off saying that, it is just my opinion and has been since Kirk was still on the team. Why would my opinion make people dislike Alex Smith more than they already do? I personally don't think my posts have any clout like that, I just speak my mind. Am I wrong sometimes? Yes, I am not some expert just a lifelong  fan of this game. Am I right sometimes, yes I am. The last one of those opinions I shared here last week was that the team should be kicking the tires on the FA RBs out there and look now they are. Does that make me right? No. I'm an armchaired QB. I don't mean to be controversial saying my opinions and I'm not attacking anyone. 

 

I don't mean to upset anyone here. But if my opinions does upset people I think people are being too controlling of the message. If I think the teams made a good choice and others don't that cool with me. I'm not into telling people what to think. I also am not into thinking like everyone else does. I just make up my own opinions. Alex is here, Kirk is gone. The title of the thread is "Lets get behind Alex Smith" and as soon as I did I upset someone. I think I will just shut up and go back to lurking as I don't want to upset anyone

[Skinsinparadise]

20 hours ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

You should be able to say it on a Redskins forum, yes, but you have to know it's just going to piss some people off and make them dislike Smith all the more. Sad, but people really are that reactionary and impressionable. 

 

I'll respond to your last post but leading with this response from you to someone else because it brings it home.  The thing is about the Kirk-Alex thing is people have history here and we recall it.  You take the post you responded to where if you didn't know the context to it -- you'd think hey here's a dude that just wants to be positive about our QB. Why can't we get behind that sentiment?  Isn't it nicer to be positive than negative?  Well, the same person who posted that was negative as heck on a thread last year trashing our QB.   So its not about an overall positive or negative take about things -- its about context.

 

And look people have a right to their opinion.  So its all cool  But the moral high ground as for one position or some claiming that they are the positive ones -- is wildly off in many cases. 

 

22 hours ago, Sandy Monk said:

Now that said, if I regard any team as potentially playoff worthy, then I give that team as much a chance to win it all as any team, sans NE.   

 

Agree but I see this team as a squeeze yourself into the playoffs type team if they get lucky.  If I had to put money on it, I don't think they make the playoffs.  I did think they would have made it with Guice.   You often need a running game to win especially in the cold weather which is playoff time.  They need to do something different IMO at running back, then riding with Kelley if they are going to squeak into the playoffs.

 

22 hours ago, Sandy Monk said:

 If people are so deflated already (not you), and feeling like the season isn't going to go anywhere, why the need to come onto a fan forum and try depressing the joy out of the ones that are still excited for the season? It's just a small pet peeve though, whatever. 

 

I was debating with someone else who loved the roster much more than I did.  I actually told him, that's cool for you, I am not trying to deflate your opinion.  So no issues with people who are enamored with the team's prospects. I am not trying to pop anyones balloon. I think like most things the style, tone and the points made can spur some of the more emotional reactions. 

 

And there is a strong (albeit not perfect) correlation between people who have this over the moon perception of Alex and those who didn't care for Kirk.  Where I am coming from that is best explained in a baseball analogy.  To me Alex is a contact hitter who can steal bases.  And I don't care how loudly people say that the dude is a power hitter and define him differently -- it just doesn't convince me based on what I watched and what I've heard. 

 

And for my taste the fact that there is in my book this weird over the top description of who Alex is and many of those same people (especially on twitter) happened to be avid Kirk haters -- isn't lost on me.  And that's not because of some forlorn feeling about losing Kirk -- but 100% about the idea that the last group that will convince me in describing Alex as something over the top and different from my own perception -- are the ones who disliked Kirk.    So that's what i mean by it cuts both ways -- depends on your point of view.   

 

As to me when I watch the games, I don't care about any of it.  I root with 100% conviction for all our players.  Back to Alex, I think he's good.  I think its possible he can be very good.  But since we see draft picks the same way -- I also look at pro players like that, too.  That is the past is prologue.  I don't just cherry pick the most positive things I've seen or heard or the negative ones.  I spend a lot of time digesting this stuff and to a fault -- ask my wife.  I am not football expert far from it but if I am not going to trust my initial opinion then what's the point.  And I sat down and watched at least 10 Alex Smith games this off season.  I watched some of them via coaches film.  I actually posted some clips on this very thread.  And yeah I was impressed with his accuracy and i love the RPO, RO funky formation stuff -- I posed some of those clips here.  But I didn't see some beast in the pocket who just lets it fly -- it just seems ridiculous to me.  He comes off to me as I will take what the defenses will give me kind of QB -- and far from a gunslinger -- and that's not a shot at him -- its actually a good thing.

 

But if you digest some of the posts, Alex can throw the ball like crazy if he wants to, he takes big risks and doesn't make mistakes.  Well if all of that is true considering the RO, RPO aspect of his game we just landed the next Tom Brady -- actually better than Brady since Alex has wheels.   If all of that came true, I'd love it.  But I don't see it.  And it has zilch to do with Kirk.  ZERO. 

[volsmet]

14 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I think it depends on your perspective.  I see some of the so called "optimists" as being hypocrites also based on Kirk because some of those same people were piling on the loses last year in the glass is half empty type of way.   Now that Kirk is gone those loses are spun in a positive way -- but if you read some of those posts at the time -- you'd get a chuckle.

 

But I don't really think its Kirk who drives the boat as the underpinning of some of the discussion.  The one IMO who is polarizing is Bruce.  And again the take depends on the perspective.  

 

There are threads where you can talk players.  A lot of people stake their claim BEFORE the moves are made.  In my book, those posts are much more interesting.  What do you want to happen and why.  And that take is pure. You are talking pure football.   Your feeling about Bruce and the FO has nothing to do with anything because you are making your claim in advance.  Lets take Alex.  I digested the idea of trading for Alex BEFORE it ever came about.  And I did it exhaustively.  My opinion about the trade then and now has been absolutely consistent.   I actually said what I'd like to see the FO do BEFORE they did it.  If they did what I wanted I'd praise them -- like I always do when they do what I pushed in advanced. 

 

But some take a criticism of a move as an indictment of Bruce as if the opinion came about AFTER it happened.  So they rush to the FO's defense as if any criticism is based on some passive aggressive attempt to undermine him.   And that turns as to the underpinning of the discussion.  To me that's wrong and even worse its boring.  The FO made a move so it's = good.  And if you don't like it -- then you are a hater.  It's ridiculous IMO.  So again, I think it depends on the perspective you are coming at it from.  You are new, so this isn't directed at you.  Just explaining some of the dynamics as I see it.   And I know i am not the only one. 

 

And sorry for the caps -- they weren't directed at you.  I just wanted to bring home why I don't think the so called "optimists" have even a whit of moral high ground.  To me optimistic feelings are great -- I've myself predicted this team to go 10-6 two seasons in a row.  I almost always predict them to win on the game day thread.   

 

 

I don't think people are clinging to his memory.  As a veteran of the Kirk debate -- these are the three points I've observed cooking for most who didn't endorse what went down.

 

Depending on the poster

 

A.  Do you trust the decision maker who led to Kirk's ouster -- are you happy that he's making the decisions going forward at least for now

 

or

 

B.  the age factor.  30-34 year old QB versus 34-38 year old QB.  Is it apples to apples.

 

or.

 

C.  you have a young roster, go get a young QB, too. 

 

Having said that, I just wanted to respond to this point you made. I don't want to relive the Kirk debate as to the contract on this thread, though.  I am burnt out.    Speaking of boring, people have heard my say on it enough. 

 

I’m among those who think it was an awful trade & thinks Alex is significantly better than Kirk. 

[HOF44]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I'll respond to your last post but leading with this response from you to someone else because it brings it home.  The thing is about the Kirk-Alex thing is people have history here and we recall it.  You take the post you responded to where if you didn't know the context to it -- you'd think hey here's a dude that just wants to be positive about our QB. Why can't we get behind that sentiment?  Isn't it nicer to be positive than negative?  Well, the same person who posted that was negative as heck on a thread last year trashing our QB.   So its not about an overall positive or negative take about things -- its about context.

 

 

It's like  Rorschach test to me.  The blobs look pretty similar but the person that was debbie downer on last years blob is all in for this years blob.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

I’m among those who think it was an awful trade & thinks Alex is significantly better than Kirk. 

 

LOL.  That's a unique position on the board.   I think you will have a much easier time convincing me Da-Ron Payne is elite than you will that Alex is significantly better than Kirk.  But hope you are right. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

The whole "circle of life" thing is still relevant, I see lol...

 

Last time, it was claimed that those who still were in love with Robert were the ones criticizing Kirk's play.

 

Now it's being claimed that those who are still in love with Kirk are criticizing Smith's play so far in his career (or at least the trade).

 

Well, except for that one guy up there lol..

[DJHJR86]

18 hours ago, Sandy Monk said:

3rd best win % of all starting QBs over the last several years. That doesn't happen for you if you are just an average chump QB. Winning football games is more than fantasy football yards and TD padding. It is efficiency, and situational strategy. It's knowing when and where to lean on team strengths. 

 

For contrast, a random 5 year period from Trent Dilfer, he had a "Qb record" of 36-18.  5 years at KC, Smith's "record" was 41-20.  That's a near identical win %.  And Dilfer was pretty much the epitome of an average QB.  Which is why grading quarterbacks on wins has always been baffling to me.  

[actorguy1]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Cliff notes:

A. Weak running game

B. Passing weapons injury prone

C. Competition within the division and the NFC in general

D. Tough schedule.  

E.  I don't buy a law of averages argument when it comes to guys coming off of injury being less likely to be injured again.  Case in point with Chris Thompson saying he was told he'd be 100% in nov. 

 

 

 

Highly respect your posts over the years. Allow me a quick rebuttal

A. The same weak running game that averaged over 100 yards a game through the first 5 weeks before injuries started piling up. I was just as excited as anyone about Guice's contribution this year but it is not a guarantee to return to the running game of the last 7 or 8 games of last season

B. Doctson played all 16 games last season. Richardson and Crowder have no significant injury history. That leaves Reed. Fingers crossed

C. NFC is the more stacked conference. We are all aware how teams rise and fall from and into obscurity every season. I still think 10-6 will be good enough to reach the playoffs.

D. The schedule this season is actually statistically  easier than last season (.543 to .504)

E.Cant directly argue against this. Again fingers crossed

[Sandy Monk]

1 minute ago, DJHJR86 said:

 

For contrast, a random 5 year period from Trent Dilfer, he had a "Qb record" of 36-18.  5 years at KC, Smith's "record" was 41-20.  That's a near identical win %.  And Dilfer was pretty much the epitome of an average QB.  Which is why grading quarterbacks on wins has always been baffling to me.  

 

Wait, what? You picked a random cycle of 5 years for Trent? which ones? He's had losing records for every year except 1997 and half of 2000. 

 

That's what you come up with? Jeezus.. you're underlining my point for me, thanks? 

[DJHJR86]

11 minutes ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

Wait, what? You picked a random cycle of 5 years for Trent? which ones? He's had losing records for every year except 1997 and half of 2000. 

 

That's what you come up with? Jeezus.. you're underlining my point for me, thanks? 

 

1997-2001 seasons, which were considered his best, and one of which he "won" a Superbowl.  And why don't people look bring up Smith's 7 seasons prior to going to KC?  38-36-1 record as a starter.  Matt Ryan is 39-41 over that same 5 year span as Smith in KC.  Brees is 43-36.  

 

Point being, measuring a quarterback based off of wins is ridiculous and doesn't tell you anything about them.  

[Skinsinparadise]

26 minutes ago, actorguy1 said:

Highly respect your posts over the years. Allow me a quick rebuttal

A. The same weak running game that averaged over 100 yards a game through the first 5 weeks before injuries started piling up. I was just as excited as anyone about Guice's contribution this year but it is not a guarantee to return to the running game of the last 7 or 8 games of last season

B. Doctson played all 16 games last season. Richardson and Crowder have no significant injury history. That leaves Reed. Fingers crossed

C. NFC is the more stacked conference. We are all aware how teams rise and fall from and into obscurity every season. I still think 10-6 will be good enough to reach the playoffs.

D. The schedule this season is actually statistically  easier than last season (.543 to .504)

E.Cant directly argue against this. Again fingers crossed

 

Cool, there is no really rebuttal to my point or for that matter your point.  It's just what's our opinion as how the season isn likely going to go down. All we can do is guess, no rights or wrongs.   The schedule when it was adjusted for team strengths from what I recall was one of the top 5 toughest in the league -- going purely with win loss, means the Giants for example are a 3-13 team, the Packers stink, etc.  But agree there is always some surprises every year as to what teams are good and bad, etc.

 

Kelley our starting RB at least for now had a wretched YPA in every game sans the Rams game.  Thompson supposedly isn't going to be 100% until Nov.

 

Richardson actually indeed does have significant injury history -- including 2 ACL tears.  

[Morneblade]

6 hours ago, Sandy Monk said:

 

Agreed, and I commend you for now conceding as much. I hope that you and others can now stop stating this as a flaw of Smith's, since basically no QBs carry their teams all the way unless they receive a good bit of help to get there.

 

The ones that seem to do it more usually get a ton of help from the officiating, imho, which goes under the radar later and perpetuates this mythical super QB dream that carries all to the finish line. It's preposterous, and makes all the little kids think the bestest QBs are holding hands with Jesus. 

 

 

Concede? I never said Smith was bad. In fact I said he was good, Just not great. Is that an issue?

 

 

43 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Why is it that I shouldn't say that Alex Smith is better than Kirk Cousins? I don't mean to piss anyone off saying that, it is just my opinion and has been since Kirk was still on the team. Why would my opinion make people dislike Alex Smith more than they already do? I personally don't think my posts have any clout like that, I just speak my mind. Am I wrong sometimes? Yes, I am not some expert just a lifelong  fan of this game. Am I right sometimes, yes I am. The last one of those opinions I shared here last week was that the team should be kicking the tires on the FA RBs out there and look now they are. Does that make me right? No. I'm an armchaired QB. I don't mean to be controversial saying my opinions and I'm not attacking anyone. 

 

I don't mean to upset anyone here. But if my opinions does upset people I think people are being too controlling of the message. If I think the teams made a good choice and others don't that cool with me. I'm not into telling people what to think. I also am not into thinking like everyone else does. I just make up my own opinions. Alex is here, Kirk is gone. The title of the thread is "Lets get behind Alex Smith" and as soon as I did I upset someone. I think I will just shut up and go back to lurking as I don't want to upset anyone

 

Dude, you can say what you want here. Heck, it's a message board, it's the reason we're here. You didn't like Kirk. You like Alex. That's peachy. I like Alex, I liked Kirk more. That's peachy too. Anytime I have a issue with what you say, it's not because you're saying you like Alex, it's just that I think that you use flawed information, and you tend to contradict yourself. Say, if Cousins made the throw you dissected, the incompletion to Kelley, you'd say that Kirk was terrible, made a bad read, tipped his hand to the defense and made a bad throw. Because I've seen you do it. That's the part I have a issue with. You're not balanced or objective when it comes to looking at these 2.

 

For some, I suppose that is part of being a fan. I've always tried to be more objective. I'm a scientist, so that's my training.

 

Alex has flaws. Kirk has flaws. Honestly, if our defense is as good as we think it might be, Alex's flaws might be a better fit. Kirk is more of a gun slinger, without a big arm. He's gonna turn the ball over, especially in the red zone, because he knew we could not run for ****, and he forced stuff, trying to do too much, trying to put the team on his back. And threw more INTs down there as a result, with no Reed. Alex won't do that, he will take what he can get, not throw the pick, and kick the FG. With a tough D, that probably works out better in the long run. Not giving short field to the opposition, or breaking the spirit if the team because you got no points when you could have gotten 3.

 

I also don't see us being a guy or 2 away from making a serious run. So going after a older QB and a 'win now" mantra doesn't make since to me. I think we need several pieces that we don't have.

[Sandy Monk]

Just now, DJHJR86 said:

 

1997-2001 seasons, which were considered his best, and one of which he "won" a Superbowl.  And why don't people look bring up Smith's 7 seasons prior to going to KC?  38-36-1 record as a starter.  Matt Ryan is 39-41 over that same 5 year span as Smith in KC.  Brees is 43-36.  

 

Point being, measuring a quarterback based off of wins is ridiculous and doesn't tell you anything about them.  

 

Measuring a QB on wins alone is foolhardy, yes. You don't need to desperately maneuver through random stats to make that case known, lol.

 

As for Alex Smith, he's had that amazing w-l record throughout the consistent and steady last several years. That may not mean jack to you.. or for whatever bizarre reason you don't want it to reflect well of him.. but it means plenty to many others and it should. I don't give a crap what his early career was as he suffered through terrible rosters, coaches, and stability. 

 

The trend clearly shows a resilient QB that amazingly crawled through the terrible and actually became quite good. Not too many QBs can say that they have done the same or similar.. not like he has. 

1 minute ago, Morneblade said:

 

Concede? I never said Smith was bad. In fact I said he was good, Just not great. Is that an issue?

 

 

I think you're just forgetting what the concession was. It wasn't your take above, which I agree with. 

 

It was the part about QBs carrying a bad team through SBs. It just doesn't happen, and it appeared that you backed away from your earlier statement about exactly that.