Shaun Hill

[CoachO]

Yeah - I get that. We were supposed to be a smash mouth offense (allegedly). I'm just not sure we can look at this team and in particular, the O-line and say that smash mouth would work. Not that you can do the same and say that a passing game will work. It seems we have some pretty big weapons at receiver/TE and a lack of ability to continuously open holes for the running game. It's tough. I would love to see them run more but not if it means a constant diet of 3rd and long. I keep hoping they can figure things out. And if Hill is part of that figuring things out, I'm all for it. I just don't know that I lean that way.

I disagree with the idea that they cannot open holes in the running game. This type of offense will be more productive the more times they hand the ball off. They will have their share of 1 & 2 yard carries. But as they continue to commit to it, those 2 yard runs will turn into 4 & 5+ yard runs. With the sheer size of this O-line, they should be able to wear teams down over the course of 4 quarters.

I agree that with the big "weapons" they have they can and will be able to throw the ball when they want to. But it will be much more effective, and efficient if they dictate when and how they throw it. Everyone seems to think facing an 8 man box is taboo. But in fact, when you can force teams to commit to 8 and 9 man boxes to stop the running game, you then can exploit them in the passing game, especially with play action. Too often this year, Schottenheimer has gone away from the running game and just started airing it out, with this last game being the worst example of it. They were in a one score game for much of the 2nd half, and he completely abandoned the running game. Which lead to 9 straight incompletions and finished with a 10 - 32 passing performance in the second half.

 

[RamzFanz]

Why is it that people just have to make up things about Hill and the people who want to see him start again just to try to run him down?

Against the Vikings the TEAM killed his drives with penalties. Without the crazy penalties, Hill is EASILY stomping them in the first half. He never looked like a deer in the headlights, that's ridiculous. He DID avoid pressure better than Davis. Davis HIMSELF says he bails out too many times and too soon. Hill is FAR better at moving up in the pocket.

No one is bashing AD. We are just saying there is very good reason to believe Hill may be better in this system. His hot reads, blitz reads, and defensive reads alone are reasons to want to see him again.

This debate is meaningless at this point. A lot of the people who support AD just want to shout down people who want to see what Hill has before the season is lost for good. Either we will or we won't and either it will be too late or it won't.

Personally, I think we will see him this week because AD is going to get crushed by Seattle with that O line.

 

[RamFan503]

I disagree with the idea that they cannot open holes in the running game. This type of offense will be more productive the more times they hand the ball off. They will have their share of 1 & 2 yard carries. But as they continue to commit to it, those 2 yard runs will turn into 4 & 5+ yard runs. With the sheer size of this O-line, they should be able to wear teams down over the course of 4 quarters.

I agree that with the big "weapons" they have they can and will be able to throw the ball when they want to. But it will be much more effective, and efficient if they dictate when and how they throw it. Everyone seems to think facing an 8 man box is taboo. But in fact, when you can force teams to commit to 8 and 9 man boxes to stop the running game, you then can exploit them in the passing game, especially with play action. Too often this year, Schottenheimer has gone away from the running game and just started airing it out, with this last game being the worst example of it. They were in a one score game for much of the 2nd half, and he completely abandoned the running game. Which lead to 9 straight incompletions and finished with a 10 - 32 passing performance in the second half.

The ONLY disagreement I would have with this is that I haven't seen the holes. Maybe it is because they abandoned the run too quickly. Maybe it's because the O-line though beefy isn't able to move people off their blocks. I'm really not sure and it is a head scratcher.

Regardless, a running game would help either QB.

 

[RamzFanz]

The ONLY disagreement I would have with this is that I haven't seen the holes. Maybe it is because they abandoned the run too quickly. Maybe it's because the O-line though beefy isn't able to move people off their blocks. I'm really not sure and it is a head scratcher.

Regardless, a running game would help either QB.

I want to see a bigger dose of Tre Mason behind GRob. I hope he's a fast learner.

 

[RamFan503]

Why is it that people just have to make up things about Hill and the people who want to see him start again just to try to run him down?

Against the Vikings the TEAM killed his drives with penalties. Without the crazy penalties, Hill is EASILY stomping them in the first half. He never looked like a deer in the headlights, that's ridiculous. He DID avoid pressure better than Davis. Davis HIMSELF says he bails out too many times and too soon. Hill is FAR better at moving up in the pocket.

No one is bashing AD. We are just saying there is very good reason to believe Hill may be better in this system. His hot reads, blitz reads, and defensive reads alone are reasons to want to see him again.

This debate is meaningless at this point. People who support AD just want to shout down people who want to see what Hill has before the season is lost for good. Either we will or we won't and either it will be too late or it won't.

Personally, I think we will see him this week because AD is going to get crushed by Seattle with that O line.

Haven't seen a lot of shouting down. And I'm not really sure what is being made up about Hill.

I realize you are probably not directing this at me but I don't see much of a body of work with Hill over the last few years and with us to really say whether he would fair better in this offense. I would certainly be for it if I did see it. And if Fish puts Hill in I will rally behind him. I just think we have a lot of fixes to make and Davis is not our biggest.

 

[RamFan503]

I want to see a bigger dose of Tre Mason behind GRob. I hope he's a fast learner.

With you there. And I think we may just get our wish this week. Just a hunch.

 

[CoachO]

The ONLY disagreement I would have with this is that I haven't seen the holes. Maybe it is because they abandoned the run too quickly. Maybe it's because the O-line though beefy isn't able to move people off their blocks. I'm really not sure and it is a head scratcher.

Regardless, a running game would help either QB.

RUSHING (PLAYS-AVERAGE YARDS) 128-4.1 I will take a 4.1 YPC all season long. 30 carries per game, = 123 yards rushing per game? I would take that.

 

[RamFan503]

RUSHING (PLAYS-AVERAGE YARDS) 128-4.1 I will take a 4.1 YPC all season long. 30 carries per game, = 123 yards rushing per game? I would take that.

Me too. I just haven't seen them sustain it when the other team adjusts.

 

[RamzFanz]

Haven't seen a lot of shouting down. And I'm not really sure what is being made up about Hill.

I realize you are probably not directing this at me but I don't see much of a body of work with Hill over the last few years and with us to really say whether he would fair better in this offense. I would certainly be for it if I did see it. And if Fish puts Hill in I will rally behind him. I just think we have a lot of fixes to make and Davis is not our biggest.

It's the Hill is old, didn't play well against the Vikings, can't run, looks like a deer in the headlights BS that I'm tried of. Hill has always been more impressive than AD up until he went out. Have you noticed it's the people who watched Hill the most like CoachO and me that want to see him? It's not coincidence. AD was horrible in TC. He's better in live games, but not consistently. Hill was consistently good.

Still, it's up to Fisher now. I'm done discussing it because few are reasonable like you on this subject.

 

[Zaphod]

My dad coached a national championship rifle team when he was in the service,they won three years in a row, he always said he'd take someone who'd never fired a rifle and had no bad habits over a good shot with bad habits he had to break.
Davis is materially a rookie,I think he compares pretty damned well to the rest of the rookie QB's currently playing ,Sunday is another big test for the kid ,I think he passes it and if we lose he probably won't be why.

Interesting analogy, and that was what I perceived as the reason for Davis' initial success.

In a way, this is Shottenheimer's chance to mold a quarterback to what he wants, and I wondered exactly how much he really values talent vs. willingness to execute, especially right now.

I'm still not sold that Hill wasn't pulled after his interception in the first game, and I have to wonder if Davis isn't considered a better option by the coaching staff for simply executing the plays called.

So he didn't have a great game against a great defense. Shottenheimer, Davis or both had trouble adjusting to the 49ers adjustment on defense and I really don't think that's a long term problem.

They will be facing another excellent defense against the chicken hawks soon enough, but it is a very different defense, we'll have to see what happens, but I don't expect a let up on the poor officiating against another NFL darling.

 

[CoachO]

Me too. I just haven't seen them sustain it when the other team adjusts.

that's cuz they go away from it... their run/pass ratio thru 5 games is not what i would have expected, and if it continues this way, it's gonna be a LONG season.

Rushes: 128 (25.6 per game) Passes: 198 (39.6 per game) That just does not look like a recipe for success to me, especially with a first year starter at QB.

 

[RamFan503]

that's cuz they go away from it... their run/pass ratio thru 5 games is not what i would have expected, and if it continues this way, it's gonna be a LONG season.

Rushes: 128 (25.6 per game) Passes: 198 (39.6 per game) That just does not look like a recipe for success to me, especially with a first year starter at QB.

I agree. A run heavy offense should help an essentially rookie QB. I'm just not seeing a 4.1 yard average as really getting it done nor do I see them sustaining that rate with the way our O-line has played as of yet. I get the math. Two runs equals a 3rd and 2. But I also see too many stuffs in there and I just don't think the confidence is there that our O-line as we've seen it, can sustain a run game and score points with it to the point that WE are tiring the other team out instead of our own O-line getting brutalized as they wear down and the other team adjusts. I just don't see our O-line looking dominatingly strong enough to do it.

Now that could change. And like I said before, I think we will see more of it against Seattle. I am guessing that Grob plays more, and Stacy is a bit healthier. Then we have three backs that can attack and an addition of a big STRONG guard to run behind. I'd love to see it happen.

 

[drasconis]

I can't say for sure why they are playing him, none of us can. I have admitted he has played better at times than I thought he would. But, for me, and this is all I am saying, Hill would give us a better chance to win these games NOW. But it doesn't matter what I, or anyone else thinks, Fisher has made his choice, for whatever reasons, and we all have to live with it.

That being said, whether it's Davis, Hill, or Bradford, if they think they have ANY chance of winning games throwing the ball 40+ times against the SF's, Seattle's , Arizona's Denver's and Kansas City's of the world, then I would seriously have to question their coaching ability. Davis threw 29 passes against Tampa Bay, and they won the game. He has thrown 156 passes in the other 3 1/2 games (44.6 per game) in the 4 losses. Pretty much seals the deal for me.

+1
Not sure why this team is trowing so much (yes the philly game it made sense - but the others it did not). It doesn't matter which QB is in this team needs to run first - especially since we have a "stable" full right now.

 

[CoachO]

I agree. A run heavy offense should help an essentially rookie QB. I'm just not seeing a 4.1 yard average as really getting it done nor do I see them sustaining that rate with the way our O-line has played as of yet. I get the math. Two runs equals a 3rd and 2. But I also see too many stuffs in there and I just don't think the confidence is there that our O-line as we've seen it, can sustain a run game and score points with it to the point that WE are tiring the other team out instead of our own O-line getting brutalized as they wear down and the other team adjusts. I just don't see our O-line looking dominatingly strong enough to do it.

Now that could change. And like I said before, I think we will see more of it against Seattle. I am guessing that Grob plays more, and Stacy is a bit healthier. Then we have three backs that can attack and an addition of a big STRONG guard to run behind. I'd love to see it happen.

not sure what you are hoping for if 4.1 ypc isnt good enough.....

 

[RamFan503]

not sure what you are hoping for if 4.1 ypc isnt good enough.....

That average is good for 19th best in the league. If we're 7th in the league in passing, those yards are going to need to be made up. If teams are keying on a rush offense that is only averaging 4.1 now, what do you think the average will be then? Now if the O-line can get better push and open up better holes, then I could easily see that average jumping up and the number of attempts along with it.

Normally, I would say that with our losing, the passing yards would be tainted by garbage time stats. But we, aside from maybe a couple drives in the Philly game, haven't been throwing in garbage time.

I too would like to see us stop abandoning the run. And I'm really kind of dumbfounded as to why we are passing so much with at minimum an inexperienced QB. But I have asked that numerous times in the past with almost every regime save maybe Robinson. There has to be a reason. I just don't know Coach. I really wish I did.

 

[Zaphod]

I agree. A run heavy offense should help an essentially rookie QB. I'm just not seeing a 4.1 yard average as really getting it done nor do I see them sustaining that rate with the way our O-line has played as of yet. I get the math. Two runs equals a 3rd and 2. But I also see too many stuffs in there and I just don't think the confidence is there that our O-line as we've seen it, can sustain a run game and score points with it to the point that WE are tiring the other team out instead of our own O-line getting brutalized as they wear down and the other team adjusts. I just don't see our O-line looking dominatingly strong enough to do it.

Now that could change. And like I said before, I think we will see more of it against Seattle. I am guessing that Grob plays more, and Stacy is a bit healthier. Then we have three backs that can attack and an addition of a big STRONG guard to run behind. I'd love to see it happen.

I definitely think we'll see even more rushing against Seattle. Kind of wasn't surprised to see Robinson in against the 9ers and I expect to see him out there against the hawks as well.

We did abandon the rush though, as we could have adjusted and continued rolling with the run as CoachO said. I've been defending Shottenheimer for a while here, and he has called some great games lately, but Monday was a big let down.

I'm with you, I wanted to see what Hill could do as well. It's not like this is his last season as a quarterback, and I don't understand why they couldn't evaluate both, But for whatever reason, Fisher "commited" to Davis.

I trust Fisher to know what he's doing though.

 

[moklerman]

Stat's like that can be very misleading. It's one thing if they line up and get 4.1 yards per rush regardless of the situation, it's another if the defense is gearing to stop the pass and they are taking advantage with a run. Or running a draw on third and long, gaining a good chunk of yardage but coming far short of the first down.

I don't have the impression that this unit is gaining 4.1 ypc for "real". If they were getting that kind of push consistently, this offense would be doing much better regardless of who the QB was.

And this crusade for Hill is just ridiculous IMO. 10 pages arguing the merits of a career backup who couldn't stay healthy for a single game when he got his chance this year. I mean, seriously!

 

[blue4]

Stat's like that can be very misleading. It's one thing if they line up and get 4.1 yards per rush regardless of the situation, it's another if the defense is gearing to stop the pass and they are taking advantage with a run. Or running a draw on third and long, gaining a good chunk of yardage but coming far short of the first down.

I don't have the impression that this unit is gaining 4.1 ypc for "real". If they were getting that kind of push consistently, this offense would be doing much better regardless of who the QB was.

And this crusade for Hill is just ridiculous IMO. 10 pages arguing the merits of a career backup who couldn't stay healthy for a single game when he got his chance this year. I mean, seriously!

I'm like you, I'm not sure this line is getting push when it counts. With the exception of 1 or 2 drives a game, I've never come away thinking we overmatched the other DL with any consistency. Part of it is our play calling, but not all. 4.1YPC isn't awful, but for a power running team it's not that great. Can't hang your hat on being a running offense when you're 19th in YPC. Perhaps that's why all the passes are being called. I'd be interested to see what our YPC is on 1st down. I don't know where a person would go to find that.

 

[Thordaddy]

It's the Hill is old, didn't play well against the Vikings, can't run, looks like a deer in the headlights BS that I'm tried of. Hill has always been more impressive than AD up until he went out. Have you noticed it's the people who watched Hill the most like CoachO and me that want to see him? It's not coincidence. AD was horrible in TC. He's better in live games, but not consistently. Hill was consistently good.

Still, it's up to Fisher now. I'm done discussing it because few are reasonable like you on this subject.

Problem with that statement is this,you really think what YOU SAW in training camp is not only superior to OUR opinion but Fishers as well,you REALLY? think what you saw is more relevant than what the coaches have seen since closing practices, in meetings, film sessions?
And what's this "reasonable " crap, you don't understand that's a direct shot at those who disagree with you implying they are unreasonable for disagreeing with you?

Yes it IS in Fishers hands and if ya don't mind me saying so,I value his opinion above yours, not just because of his experience ,but his job depends on these decisions ,he has more to lose .

"Play the game for more than you can afford to lose... only then will you learn the game."

Winston Churchill

 

[Faceplant]

I'm of the opinion that Hill would make better decisions than AD. We can't improve the players on defense or O line. That's pretty much the best we have. We CAN improve the QB play, IMO.

This week, with this team, Hill has a better chance of winning.

If we've quit worrying about wins, then by all means, keep getting AD experience.

Wait, so the level of play of the ENTIRE defense as well as the O Line is pretty much static in your eyes, but if we replace this one player at QB we can magically transform a season for entire team? Sorry, that doesn't work for me. It is not about any SINGLE player....at any position. I absolutely expect a defensive UNIT that was above average last year, and is arguably more talented this year, to improve on this disastrous beginning of a season. I also expect our OL to get better if they can remain healthy for a good stretch. I ALSO expect the starting QB to get better as he plays more. Just my .02.....