Shaun Hill vs. Tony Romo - Page 4

CJSchneider · 03-06-2009, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by no love

Also, at 9 million a year Alex Smith's only trade value is if he restructures... which in that case he is the most valuable to us.

Isn't that what I said?

Dirk360 · 03-07-2009, 12:56 PM

Who are they?

Malaka · 03-07-2009, 01:06 PM

EDIT: Moved it to the thread

YAYareaRB · 03-08-2009, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirk360

Who are they?

You'll get no laughs from me.

Iamcanadian · 03-09-2009, 04:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJSchneider

OK, well allow me to explain. That my friend is because of internal politics. The Cowboys knew at the on-set of 06 Bledsoe (4.6 mil contract) would not be coming back, so they insert Romo (2.3 mil contract and yes, he had been groomed for the job); half the price for a starter to take over for a guy who was not coming back.

Quote:

Parcells has always preferred experienced QB's over inexperienced ones everywhere he has coached. He was in fact very reluctant to go with Romo until he was forced to. Money had nothing to do with the decision.

Furthermore, Parcells was an established Coach (he didn't have to worry about a resume) who knew that if it didn't work and he was criticized by the Front Office, he could leave and get picked up elsewhere no problem.

Quote:

This part is quite true. He was in a position where he can get away with things other HC's might not be able to try.

The 49ers have a guy they drafted with the #1 overall pick who they are paying 9 mil (and trying like hell to fix that may I add). If you suddenly switch up now, a lot of people are going to be pissed. Politically, it's better to say we are still working on the 9 million dollar project so all that money does not seem like a waste. Of course Singletary is going to "protect" the investment, if he doesn't his trade value goes to crap if his contract can't get taken care of and they decide to trade him.

While it is very true that GM's/HC's are very reluctant to give up on a high priced rookie, Singletary has no such commitment to Smith since he had nothing to do with bringing Smith on board. In fact he needed to show he could win to even get the job full time which is why he inserted Hill into the lineup.
You cannot protect a flop whose trade value is already nothing and trading him isn't even an option.
Hill doesn't have the talent to be a starter in this league. He is a career backup and nothing more and comparing him to Romo in a year when Romo was injured won't change that. While I disagree with some that Romo has proved himself a franchise QB, he is a lot closer than Hill will ever smell.
All the silly stats in the world are not going to change what Hill is, a career backup. San Fran knows it and are desperately looking for a true starter, apparently you disagree with them, it's your privilege.

YAYareaRB · 03-09-2009, 12:29 PM

Hill and Romo have the same amount of playoff wins..

D-Unit · 03-09-2009, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YAYareaRB

Hill and Romo have the same amount of playoff wins..

That's about as relevant as saying they both have 4 letters in their last name.

YAYareaRB · 03-09-2009, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D-Unit

That's about as relevant as saying they both have 4 letters in their last name.

Not quite.. People are claiming Romo is more of a franchise QB than Hill will ever be. I'm just proving that that statement cannot be based on playoff wins, since both subjects have zero. Now I understand Hill has yet to reach the playoffs and Romo is been in the playoffs every year he's been starting except this past season. But it's interesting to see that no playoff wins can earn you the title of a franchise QB even though he had a 2 pro bowl receivers, a pro bowl TE, a pro bowl OL, pro bowl running back.. While Hill has one pro bowler on the offense.

Saints-Tigers · 03-09-2009, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 21ST

Well if it makes you feel any better i think they both suck

I'm with this guy.

gpngc · 03-09-2009, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D-Unit

That's about as relevant as saying they both have 4 letters in their last name.

But they don't. R-o-m-o has four letters. C-h-r-i-s-t has six.

abaddon41_80 · 03-09-2009, 04:26 PM

I find it funny how no one in this topic has given any reason why Shaun Hill can't be a good quarterback other than, "Shaun Hill isn't a franchise QB," while his supporters have posted plenty of numbers proving that he can be. Yet the people that think he sucks think they are right for some reason.

MetSox17 · 03-09-2009, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaddon41_80

I find it funny how no one in this topic has given any reason why Shaun Hill can't be a good quarterback other than, "Shaun Hill isn't a franchise QB," while his supporters have posted plenty of numbers proving that he can be. Yet the people that think he sucks think they are right for some reason.

Because the only people that think Shaun Hill is a franchise quarterback are delusional 49ers fans. Haven't you noticed?

Brent · 03-09-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17

Because the only people that think Shaun Hill is a franchise quarterback are delusional 49ers fans. Haven't you noticed?

I'll add my two cents:

Someone brought this up in the Niners thread but I think it's worth mentioning here: it might not be that they are "delusional" and think he's great but rather that they want to see him succeed instead of them being certain he's good, given what he did this past season. I can't speak for all the Niners fans here but that's my impression.

Personally, I like the guy for what he did last year. I believe the jury is still out on him and I would love to see him get a chance and to see him succeed, which I am sure would please all the fans.

What I believe sparks a lot of endless and annoying debating comes from many Niners fans (on this forum) who aren't exactly fans of taking another QB so high after Alex Smith, especially after only 16 collegiate starts and a cast of incredible talent surrounding him. Now, if it were someone like Stafford being mocked to the Niners, I am sure they would only be a small number, if any, of Niners fans who wouldn't want Stafford.

If Bradford had come out this year, I think there would be a much greater division among the Niners fans here about taking Bradford. However, that's not the case and not worth debating (please).

gpngc · 03-09-2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abaddon41_80

I find it funny how no one in this topic has given any reason why Shaun Hill can't be a good quarterback other than, "Shaun Hill isn't a franchise QB," while his supporters have posted plenty of numbers proving that he can be. Yet the people that think he sucks think they are right for some reason.

There is no such thing as a reason he "can't". He very well could. There is no proof for us Hill-bashers. The only proof we have will come in due time.

An indicator for me would be that the coaching staff gave the starting job to JTO over Hill to start the season.

phlysac · 03-09-2009, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

An indicator for me would be that the coaching staff gave the starting job to JTO over Hill to start the season.

The truth is that Mike Martz gave the #1 QB job to JT O'Sullivan after only 2 practices in training camp. The pressure for both he and Nolan to win "right away" put JTO at the helm because he didn't need time to learn Martz's system. There was no competition for the starter role in 2008. It was simply given to O'Sullivan because of his comfort in the system.

gpngc · 03-09-2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phlysac

The truth is that Mike Martz gave the #1 QB job to JT O'Sullivan after only 2 practices in training camp. The pressure for both he and Nolan to win "right away" put JTO at the helm because he didn't need time to learn Martz's system. There was no competition for the starter role in 2008. It was simply given to O'Sullivan because of his comfort in the system.

Sounds like an excuse.

A true franchise QB transcends this "comfort in the system" stuff and takes the job away from a guy who we can all (hopefully) agree is not a starter-quality NFL QB.

phlysac · 03-09-2009, 05:22 PM

You can't make broad generalizations in response to a specific event. Brett Favre, Tom Brady, Johnny Unitas... an endless list of QB's who wouldn't fit your most recent description of "franchise". I'm not even defending Shaun Hill. I'm one of the 49er fans that question his ability to make enough throws to keep pressure off the running game. But to say that he obviously isn't a "Franchise" QB because Martz used his boy JTO isn't relevant to this situation. It had NOTHING to do with "comfort in the system". In had to do with the fact that only JTO KNEW the system. The other QBs were forced to learn it from the sidelines.

gpngc · 03-09-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phlysac

You can't make broad generalizations in response to a specific event. Brett Favre, Tom Brady, Johnny Unitas... an endless list of QB's who wouldn't fit your most recent description of "franchise". I'm not even defending Shaun Hill. I'm one of the 49er fans that question his ability to make enough throws to keep pressure off the running game. But to say that he obviously isn't a "Franchise" QB because Martz used his boy JTO isn't relevant to this situation. It had NOTHING to do with "comfort in the system". In had to do with the fact that only JTO KNEW the system. The other QBs were forced to learn it from the sidelines.

The difference in those situations is that they had guys in front of them who were at least adequate QBs.

JTO is an awful starting QB. You've got to beat him out. My point is a simple one. This guy couldn't beat out JTO in preseason. No need to get more in depth than that point.

abaddon41_80 · 03-09-2009, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17

Because the only people that think Shaun Hill is a franchise quarterback are delusional 49ers fans. Haven't you noticed?

No one thinks Hill is a "franchise" quarterback. Most 49er fans believe that he is a very good quarterback that can lead the 49ers to a division title and possibly a playoff win or two in the next couple of years. From what we have seen from him so far there is no reason to think otherwise.

abaddon41_80 · 03-09-2009, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brent

What I believe sparks a lot of endless and annoying debating comes from many Niners fans (on this forum) who aren't exactly fans of taking another QB so high after Alex Smith, especially after only 16 collegiate starts and a cast of incredible talent surrounding him. Now, if it were someone like Stafford being mocked to the Niners, I am sure they would only be a small number, if any, of Niners fans who wouldn't want Stafford.

If Bradford had come out this year, I think there would be a much greater division among the Niners fans here about taking Bradford. However, that's not the case and not worth debating (please).

True. If Stafford falls to the 49ers and they don't take him I am going to be highly upset.

phlysac · 03-09-2009, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

My point is a simple one. This guy couldn't beat out JTO in preseason. No need to get more in depth than that point.

I'd agree if your point was that simple as applied to the situation in SF last preseason. It was widely reported that Alex Smith and Shawn Hill didn't get any reps with the first team. The job was GIVEN to JTO, not earned. It's not as simple to "beat someone out" when you're not given the opportunity.

Menardo75 · 03-09-2009, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17

Because the only people that think Shaun Hill is a franchise quarterback are delusional 49ers fans. Haven't you noticed?

Sounds like the Cowboy fans are in the same boat then.

Menardo75 · 03-09-2009, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpngc

The difference in those situations is that they had guys in front of them who were at least adequate QBs.

JTO is an awful starting QB. You've got to beat him out. My point is a simple one. This guy couldn't beat out JTO in preseason. No need to get more in depth than that point.

If a coach decides anything the competition ends there end of story.

D-Unit · 03-09-2009, 05:56 PM

I don't get how Romo got brought into this of all QBs out there... Why not Carson Palmer, Jay Cutler, Drew Brees, etc...

I'm not going to defend Romo being a franchise QB. I don't even know what that even means to most people. If it's an NFL QB who doesn't have to worry about losing his job, then yeah, he's that. If it means being the face of the franchise, being a leader and example, then yeah, he's on his way. But if it means some excellent All-Pro, then no, I don't think he's in the upper echelon of NFL QBs. He makes too many careless mistakes to be there. He's still young enough to eventually be that kind of QB, but he'll need more good years. I think his status kind of took a hit this year with him missing 3 games with that hand injury. Cowboys would be in the playoffs if he didn't miss any time. The team was night and day without him.

gpngc · 03-09-2009, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phlysac

I'd agree if your point was that simple as applied to the situation in SF last preseason. It was widely reported that Alex Smith and Shawn Hill didn't get any reps with the first team. The job was GIVEN to JTO, not earned. It's not as simple to "beat someone out" when you're not given the opportunity.

And you think this was based ONLY on the fact that JTO was more comfortable in the system and had nothing to do with the staff not having a favorable opinion of either Smith or Hill?

My point again is simple: why was Shaun Hill so hamstrung? What was it that made him so easy to simply exclude in favor of J. Turnovers. O?