Warner4Prez
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2010
- Messages
- 2,266
- Name
- Benny
I am not saying that Hill would take those hits any better than Davis. What I am saying, is the game plan and how defenses attack an offense with Hill would not be similar to how they are attacking Davis. SF has blitzed very little in their previous 4 games. If Shawn Hill is at QB, and shows the ability to diagnose the blitz PRE-SNAP and gets the ball out of his hand quicker, there is no reason to think he takes the number of hits.I supported the decision to go back to Hill once healthy for many of the same reasons you conjure O ,but one fact remains there is no way Hills 30sumpthin slightly overweight body gets up from the hits Davis took last night .
For Fisher to go back on his starting QB now would be wishy washy ,he's changed his mind once and told the kid not to look over his shoulder ,he needs to stand by that.
I don't even think you have to criticize Hill to make the case that the experience Davis gets from here on out we can bank and JMO AFTER Fisher benched Hill in favor of Davis ,I rate the chance Hill even wants to be here slim,if I was in his position I'd take a deal elsewhere next year just would.How do you not understand that that's the same thing?
Unless you're saying they should see what they have in Hill in practice in which case they already did. And in preseason. And training camp. And the 13 years prior. We already know what we have in Hill and that's not much. The guy we don't know about is Davis and that's what they're trying to figure out.
some of us weren't so quiet. Just dismissed as being foolish.It's funny how people were quiet about their disdain for Davis when he played against the eagles now since he had a so so game everyone is coming out the wood works, be consistent with your dislike don't turn into a vulture attacking a carcass
Why? He won't be around next season, plus everyone has said the season is over, why not just give Davis the experience. Its not his fault that the niners D is top 5, I still don't know why they stopped running the ball the second half.. or am I just blocking that out of my memory? But yeah, Davis all the way.
receivers were not getting much separation and the line was messing up.
Jerry,
Let me ask you this, you are one of the guys I think really "gets it" on here, so I would like to think we could have a decent discussion on this topic.
SF has done little blitzing throughout their first 4 games. That being said, I fully expected them to bring blitzes throughout the night, especially after falling behind. A lot of people are pointing fingers at the Offensive line for the pressure, but after being at the game, then re-watching it, MOST of the protection issues came from blitzes where they overpowered TEs (Harkey and Kendricks were brutal), or RBs (Mason twice). In every single case, these blitzes were not well disguised, and Davis just doesn't' seem to recognize them at all. He seems to be f ocusing on where HIS team is lined up, or when to put guys in motion, and spends very little time trying to get a pre-snap read of any kind of the defense.
Maybe its just me, but I have serious doubts that Fangio would have incorporated the high number of blitzes if Shawn Hill were in the game, which in turn, would have limited the number of "hits" on him altogether. I realize there were breakdowns in protections, Long getting beaten clean on the first sack.. Not Davis' fault at all. Those things are gonna happen in every game.
I also think one of Davis' biggest shortcomings, is he doesn't get thru his progressions, and like most young QBs he has a tendency to bail on the pocket way too early. If he doesn't see that first or second target, he just bails and tries to keep extend the play, and usually it ends up with him forcing the ball somewhere. For every "highlight" play he makes doing this, there are 4 "bad" plays.
There were many instances last night, where Davis had plenty of time to get the ball out, and either missed on the throw, or ended up "feeling" pressure and stepped right up into it. These are things I just don't see Hill doing. As ordinary as SF's secondary is supposed to be, Davis just wasn't good enough against them, to give this team much of a chance. And with Seattle coming to town this week, it will be even worse IMO.
I think Fisher has backed himself into a corner here by naming Davis the full time starter. And I don't anticipate him making any changes. But for me at least, I think the next few weeks are going to be very difficult for young Mr. Davis, and we are about to see why he was a week away from being back to coaching at Westmisinster.
I don't know man. That INT before getting injured in the Minny game was pretty damn bad. You don't think he has more of those in him? Especially with how this line is playing? I think we need to see what we have in Davis. And I didn't see the tons of time you seem to think he had.
The thing is even before Bradford got hurt all of his ints where pick 6's. The fumbles are a little hard to judge even the best fumble when they are constantly hit from the blindside and yet even with those mistakes He as in Davis put the team in position to win. A lot of people wanted Keenum who never won a game but because Davis is 1-3 hill needs to be back in. I can understand not liking a guy but to completely say Davis is the one who lost the game is asinine. Iirc this is a team game you win you lose as a team and right now special teams defense and drops have played a role in all 3 losses. Not just Qb playsome of us weren't so quiet. Just dismissed as being foolish.
How do you not understand that that's the same thing?
Unless you're saying they should see what they have in Hill in practice in which case they already did. And in preseason. And training camp. And the 13 years prior. We already know what we have in Hill and that's not much. The guy we don't know about is Davis and that's what they're trying to figure out.
Because Bradford wasn't throwing pick sixes virtually every game. Davis has made 4 starts and has handed opposing defenses FIVE TD's via INT or fumbles lost.
It seems like you have been waiting for a game like this from Davis. While you fail to realize that Shaun hill would be getting crushed behind this Oline. Davis isn't perfect but why give up on the possibility of the future Shaun hill isn't the future. Fisher has already stated that Davis is the guy and rightfully so. Anyone expecting Davis to be prefect aren't being realistic. This team has a lot of issues and the last one is Davis. How many catches did Quick have.? Britt wasn't 100 percent and the defense was a total let down. Very disappointed in Jenkins but he will bounce back just like Davis and maybe we win next week
Most young QBs aren't particularly great at it. It takes time.
But I don't agree with you. I think they would have been blitzing either ways. They were running stunts and blitzing up front as soon as they saw we weren't picking it up. It's been that way all year. It's not Davis. Harkey has looked bad this year numerous times picking up blitzers. Kendricks failed to pick one up. Our HBs, aside from Stacy, aren't good at it.
Fangio is simply doing what smart teams have done, attack our weakness. I don't believe Hill changes anything.
He is flushing from the pocket too quickly. He even admitted such. Needs to improve. And he needs to be more decisive when he does it. Either run it or throw it. He often waits too long to do either.
As far as progressions go, depends on the play. At times, he does it well. At other times, he gets too aggressive and negates his check-down options and short routes. He gets a little too intent on completing passes down the field. That was an issue in the 2nd half.
The second half was bad for the entire team...including Davis. But I think you're overstating things here. And SF's secondary wasn't ordinary in this game. That might have been what they're supposed to be but they did a really good job of clamping down on our guys in the 2nd half.
SF and Seattle are difficult for any QB. Lets not hold Davis to a standard we wouldn't hold Bradford to. From what I've seen so far, it's a mixed bag. I want to see if he improves and makes changes with more experience and how he adapts to defenses adapting to him. Things could either go very badly or Davis could prove himself to be a legitimate asset to this team. We'll see.
But I don't agree with the coaching comment. Say what you will, he's looked great for a 3rd string QB. At worst, I think the kid has proven himself to be a solid backup for this team.
It's funny how people were quiet about their disdain for Davis when he played against the eagles now since he had a so so game everyone is coming out the wood works, be consistent with your dislike don't turn into a vulture attacking a carcass
I have never said that Austin Davis is why this team lost last night, or any of the other 3 games. What I have said, and maintain, is he is not the QB, IMO, that many in here seem to want to make him out to be. Because he throws for a ton of yardage, and makes that "WOW" play once or twice a game, they seem to want to overlook the critical and major mistakes he continues to make.The thing is even before Bradford got hurt all of his ints where pick 6's. The fumbles are a little hard to judge even the best fumble when they are constantly hit from the blindside and yet even with those mistakes He as in Davis put the team in position to win. A lot of people wanted Keenum who never won a game but because Davis is 1-3 hill needs to be back in. I can understand not liking a guy but to completely say Davis is the one who lost the game is asinine. Iirc this is a team game you win you lose as a team and right now special teams defense and drops have played a role in all 3 losses. Not just Qb play
I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying Hill is too old or will be gone next season. The dude is 34, that's not old for a QB. If he excelles, he could have 5-6 good years in him.
So, why do I want to see him play? To see if the Rams can win and to see if they should re-sign him.
I can live with needing to gain experience to see what value he has moving forward. But there seems to be way too many in here who think he is the answer because of a couple of big yardage games. He has thrown 185 passes in 4 1/2 games, and the only game he started in, which he didn't throw the ball 40+ times was in Tampa and BTW, the only win. I get that many like the "gunslinger" approach, but I am not one of them. I would much rather have someone who will take shots when they are there, and take what the defense gives you the other times, to TAKE CARE OF THE FOOTBALL.
For me, I don't care about how many yards he throws for, or how many passes he misses on, its' the BAD decisions that have lead directly to the FOUR "pick 6's", and just not being aware of where the poorly disguised blitzes are coming from pre-snap.
The other thing is for me, I don't get the "he has looked great for a 3rd string QB" comment. That sounds like a major qualifier to me, justifying poor play. Oh well, he's a 3rd string QB, so give him a break. Keith Null looked great for a 3rd string QB, but he was still a 3rd string QB. Austin Davis, is a 3rd string QB who just happens to have been given the keys to the offense.
Last time I checked, the really good old ones are usually the elite quarterbacks..that become good when they get old.. Hill was probably good but now he's old and most likely declined..