Alex Smith

[Matthean]

Let's just say the temperature in GB is slightly cooler than in San Fran.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Let's just say the temperature in GB is slightly cooler than in San Fran.

You *say* that, but it was 51 degrees here on the 11th, followed by 6 inches of snow on the 12th.

This year, I'm not sure I'd have the stones to predict what the weather's going to be like next weekend.

[Matthean]

10 day forecast puts the high around mid 30s.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Matthean

10 day forecast puts the high around mid 30s.

10 day forecast did the same thing leading into the 11th and the weather went "LOL WI". Projected low 30s, ended up being 51.

Now, I'm not saying it won't be mid-30s, but realize that even that's high for January (20s is more normal; average for January 22nd is 24 or so).

If you wanna compare to last year, the high was 10 or 11 on 1/22/11. So you're already talking about a significantly warmer day than is usual for the area this time of year. The 6" of snow we got on the 12th was the first significant snowfall we've had all year.

The 10-day was doing the same thing around the New Year, if I'm not mistaken. My birthday was projected at 30-something, and it ended up being 51. It was like "What the hell? Who invited October back?"

All I'm saying is, 37's quite possible, but the forecast has been unpredictable as all hell in Green Bay this winter. It could end up being 17, or we could see 51 again.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

10 day forecast did the same thing leading into the 11th and the weather went "LOL WI". Projected low 30s, ended up being 51.

Now, I'm not saying it won't be mid-30s, but realize that even that's high for January (20s is more normal; average for January 22nd is 24 or so).

If you wanna compare to last year, the high was 10 or 11 on 1/22/11. So you're already talking about a significantly warmer day than is usual for the area this time of year. The 6" of snow we got on the 12th was the first significant snowfall we've had all year.

The 10-day was doing the same thing around the New Year, if I'm not mistaken. My birthday was projected at 30-something, and it ended up being 51. It was like "What the hell? Who invited October back?"

All I'm saying is, 37's quite possible, but the forecast has been unpredictable as all hell in Green Bay this winter. It could end up being 17, or we could see 51 again.

tl;dr Long-range weather forecasting sucks.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

tl;dr Long-range weather forecasting sucks.

True enough.

What I'm saying is, the first few years I lived out here, 'sucked' was still like horseshoes and hand grenades. Close enough, you know? They'd predict 30, and it'd be 25 instead. Whoopee.

This year? No.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by SackAttack

10 day forecast did the same thing leading into the 11th and the weather went "LOL WI". Projected low 30s, ended up being 51.

Now, I'm not saying it won't be mid-30s, but realize that even that's high for January (20s is more normal; average for January 22nd is 24 or so).

If you wanna compare to last year, the high was 10 or 11 on 1/22/11. So you're already talking about a significantly warmer day than is usual for the area this time of year. The 6" of snow we got on the 12th was the first significant snowfall we've had all year.

The 10-day was doing the same thing around the New Year, if I'm not mistaken. My birthday was projected at 30-something, and it ended up being 51. It was like "What the hell? Who invited October back?"

All I'm saying is, 37's quite possible, but the forecast has been unpredictable as all hell in Green Bay this winter. It could end up being 17, or we could see 51 again.

Those are pretty much the high for the week so there easily could be a lower temperature during the game. San Fran was still 50+ today.

[stevew]

Perhaps there were some things said in here that weren't necessarily correct in retrospect. Gotta admit, though, Smith has had absolutely the longest leash I've ever seen given to a #1 pick. Guys don't just get demoted 2-3 times, and then miss entire seasons and get benched for Shaun Hill and JT O'Sullivan and then still get another chance to start and look good and then get benched yet again and then get traded and suddenly look special in the playoffs. If this shit happened in FOF everyone would be MF'ing the game and being like wtf is this volatility BS.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by stevew

Perhaps there were some things said in here that weren't necessarily correct in retrospect. Gotta admit, though, Smith has had absolutely the longest leash I've ever seen given to a #1 pick. Guys don't just get demoted 2-3 times, and then miss entire seasons and get benched for Shaun Hill and JT O'Sullivan and then still get another chance to start and look good and then get benched yet again and then get traded and suddenly look special in the playoffs. If this shit happened in FOF everyone would be MF'ing the game and being like wtf is this volatility BS.

We've seen other players come on later in their careers, like Rich Gannon.

[Julio Riddols]

The ultimate game manager that can sometimes step up into elite level play. I think he was just a late bloomer who people always saw the talent and work ethic in. He doesn't make mistakes often, and when you surround a QB like that with a strong supporting cast, he won't lose you many games on his own. Might not win many by himself either, but that kind of steady play will give a good team a chance against anyone.

[CraigSca]

Was listening to a radio show in Orlando that had one of the guys from Football Outsiders. The show was devoted to quarterbacks and attempting to quantify them statistically. The gentleman from FO was saying that Alex Smith was probably the most underrated QB in the NFL, and, according to their analysis was better than Kaepernick. This was about 4 weeks ago.

[Julio Riddols]

I'm actually hoping he helps change things so QB's get a longer leash sometimes. There are guys you can tell don't have it like Weeden and Gabbert, then there are guys like Smith who had it, but just needed the right scheme. He also seems to be exceptionally mentally tough after dealing with being unwanted for much of his career.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

We've seen other players come on later in their careers, like Rich Gannon.

See also: Steve Beurelein, Chris Chandler, Tommy Maddox.

[Senator]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

See also: Steve Beurelein, Chris Chandler, Tommy Maddox.

Jeff George, Bob Avellini, James Harris, Don Strock

[Julio Riddols]

Seems like it happens about twice every decade or so.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Senator

Jeff George, Bob Avellini, James Harris, Don Strock

Trent Dilfer.

One thing that was often overlooked early in his career was how young Smith was - he was actually 20 when he was drafted. Even now when it feels like he's been around forever, he's not even 30 years old. Compare that to an Aaron Rodgers or Tom Brady who didn't start until they were 24, and think about how much you developed over those years.

[cuervo72]

Heck, Steve Young was 30 when he started for SF.

[fantom1979]

Then you have a guy like Vinnie Testaverde, had 275 career touchdowns and 267 career picks, but somehow in 1998, at age 35, goes 29TD/7INT with a 101.6 Passer Rating. Jets went 12-1 in games he started.

Considering that in his first 11 years Testaverde was 48-83 as a starter and threw more picks than touchdowns, it is amazing that he was still in the league in '98. Granted, he did play on some brutal Tampa teams early in his career.

[TroyF]

Funny reading my posts in the thread. I started out supporting Smith and then became frustrated when he didn't develop. Never got back into the thread until now. I don't think he's a franchise QB, but I do think he's a good QB.

He's a guy that needs a good defense and weapons around him to be successful. The shootout in Indy is something he's generally not capable of getting involved in. I do think you can win a Super Bowl with him, I just don't think he can be the focal point if you do. If the Chiefs win it with him as QB, it'll be because Charles opens up the play action game, they get a true deep threat AND above average TE, and the defense plays like it did the first seven weeks against real life NFL QB's instead of backups.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by CraigSca

Was listening to a radio show in Orlando that had one of the guys from Football Outsiders. The show was devoted to quarterbacks and attempting to quantify them statistically. The gentleman from FO was saying that Alex Smith was probably the most underrated QB in the NFL, and, according to their analysis was better than Kaepernick. This was about 4 weeks ago.

Very shocked at this one. Football Outsiders final numbers ranked Keapernick at #8 and Smith at #20 in their QB rankings. Last year Kaep came in at #13, Smith at #15.

QBR puts Keap at #7, Smith at #24.

While the numbers are similar, Kaep had to go against top ten defenses 7 times. In fact, of the top 7 defenses in football, he only missed Cincy and his own team. Smith, on the other hand, faced a bottom half of the league defense in 10 of his 15 starts.

[flere-imsaho]

Quoting myself from 2005 to expose how very wrong I was:

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Besides, what I've heard out of Green Bay is that Rodgers is appalling. They should have gotten J.P. Losman instead (Favre clone, needs a few years to learn).

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Funny reading my posts in the thread. I started out supporting Smith and then became frustrated when he didn't develop. Never got back into the thread until now. I don't think he's a franchise QB, but I do think he's a good QB.

He's a guy that needs a good defense and weapons around him to be successful. The shootout in Indy is something he's generally not capable of getting involved in. I do think you can win a Super Bowl with him, I just don't think he can be the focal point if you do. If the Chiefs win it with him as QB, it'll be because Charles opens up the play action game, they get a true deep threat AND above average TE, and the defense plays like it did the first seven weeks against real life NFL QB's instead of backups.

As I said on Saturday, Smith put up 30 points or more in 3 of his last 4 starts. The guy can score. He's not going to go out and throw for 400 yards and 4 touchdowns just because he can. Can he do that? Absolutely. But why do it if you don't have to?

His performance on Saturday was phenomenal. He threw for 378 yards and 4 TDs, with absolutely zero playmakers. Charles goes down in the first series. Avery had one big bomb before he went down. Dwayne Bowe is nothing more than a No. 2 wideout. He has no TE or other dependable receivers. Denver has five receivers better than anybody Kansas City has.

Smith is an outlier without a doubt. I think much of his lack of development his first five years in the league had a lot to do with age and completely dysfunctional coaching. Singletary and Nolan are horrible head coaches with no offensive common sense whatsoever. He went from the spread option in Utah to an Air Coryell offense in San Francisco with a different coordinator every season. It wasn't until Harbaugh came along that decided maybe he should tailor the offense to his QB. You almost have to disregard the first five years of his career.

I love Smith, and I admit I'm not sure I'd label him a franchise quarterback in the sense that he's a guy who can lead you to the playoffs almost every year for eight years. He's better than Cutler. I'd take him over Flacco and Romo too -- say what you will, but Alex Smith didn't lose a single game for his team this year.

I'm not sure the lesson to learn from Smith is that NFL teams need to give QBs more time and a longer leash than the lesson you need to get QBs doing what they're good at. Too many teams try to pound square pegs into round holes.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

As I said on Saturday, Smith put up 30 points or more in 3 of his last 4 starts. The guy can score. He's not going to go out and throw for 400 yards and 4 touchdowns just because he can. Can he do that? Absolutely. But why do it if you don't have to?

His performance on Saturday was phenomenal. He threw for 378 yards and 4 TDs, with absolutely zero playmakers. Charles goes down in the first series. Avery had one big bomb before he went down. Dwayne Bowe is nothing more than a No. 2 wideout. He has no TE or other dependable receivers. Denver has five receivers better than anybody Kansas City has.

Smith is an outlier without a doubt. I think much of his lack of development his first five years in the league had a lot to do with age and completely dysfunctional coaching. Singletary and Nolan are horrible head coaches with no offensive common sense whatsoever. He went from the spread option in Utah to an Air Coryell offense in San Francisco with a different coordinator every season. It wasn't until Harbaugh came along that decided maybe he should tailor the offense to his QB. You almost have to disregard the first five years of his career.

I love Smith, and I admit I'm not sure I'd label him a franchise quarterback in the sense that he's a guy who can lead you to the playoffs almost every year for eight years. He's better than Cutler. I'd take him over Flacco and Romo too -- say what you will, but Alex Smith didn't lose a single game for his team this year.

I'm not sure the lesson to learn from Smith is that NFL teams need to give QBs more time and a longer leash than the lesson you need to get QBs doing what they're good at. Too many teams try to pound square pegs into round holes.

Nailed it.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

As I said on Saturday, Smith put up 30 points or more in 3 of his last 4 starts. The guy can score. He's not going to go out and throw for 400 yards and 4 touchdowns just because he can. Can he do that? Absolutely. But why do it if you don't have to?

His performance on Saturday was phenomenal. He threw for 378 yards and 4 TDs, with absolutely zero playmakers. Charles goes down in the first series. Avery had one big bomb before he went down. Dwayne Bowe is nothing more than a No. 2 wideout. He has no TE or other dependable receivers. Denver has five receivers better than anybody Kansas City has.

Smith is an outlier without a doubt. I think much of his lack of development his first five years in the league had a lot to do with age and completely dysfunctional coaching. Singletary and Nolan are horrible head coaches with no offensive common sense whatsoever. He went from the spread option in Utah to an Air Coryell offense in San Francisco with a different coordinator every season. It wasn't until Harbaugh came along that decided maybe he should tailor the offense to his QB. You almost have to disregard the first five years of his career.

I love Smith, and I admit I'm not sure I'd label him a franchise quarterback in the sense that he's a guy who can lead you to the playoffs almost every year for eight years. He's better than Cutler. I'd take him over Flacco and Romo too -- say what you will, but Alex Smith didn't lose a single game for his team this year.

I'm not sure the lesson to learn from Smith is that NFL teams need to give QBs more time and a longer leash than the lesson you need to get QBs doing what they're good at. Too many teams try to pound square pegs into round holes.

+2

So excited to see what weapons they can put around Charles and Smith with another offseason of moves. They did extremely well in their first offseason.

[Logan]

I'm glad Smith was good enough to turn the 3rd rounder owed to the Niners this year into a 2nd.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by Logan

I'm glad Smith was good enough to turn the 3rd rounder owed to the Niners this year into a 2nd.

Nailed it 2: Electric Bugaloo.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Logan

I'm glad Smith was good enough to turn the 3rd rounder owed to the Niners this year into a 2nd.

So are the Chiefs fans, so everyone's happy.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

So are the Chiefs fans, so everyone's happy.

Speaking of Chiefs fans' opinions, are you really not going to share your thoughts on Saturday?

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Logan

Speaking of Chiefs fans' opinions, are you really not going to share your thoughts on Saturday?

"They were who we thought they were."

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by Logan

Speaking of Chiefs fans' opinions, are you really not going to share your thoughts on Saturday?

I actually had a 150 person event start at 7:00 PM at the winery, so it was a nice distraction from what we saw right before it started. Hence the reason I didn't post hardly at all after that time.

Would have loved to see the Chiefs win, but the injury string was brutal. Felt like I was watching the football version of 'Ten Little Indians'. Add in the fortuitous bounce on the fumble and it was just one of those days.

Considering what they had coming into this season, I'm thrilled with what we saw overall and I'm excited to see what Reid and staff can do with another offseason of work.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Considering what they had coming into this season, I'm thrilled with what we saw overall and I'm excited to see what Reid and staff can do with another offseason of work.

I think three things concern me about the Chiefs heading into next season:

1. The defense obviously isn't as good as everyone thought when they were shutting down cupcakes at the beginning of the year.

2. Andy Reid. I think he made some really questionable decisions heading down the stretch, including resting his starters in San Diego.

3. Finishing 2-6 after a 9-0 start will definitely have the players thinking heading into 2014. "Are we the 2-14 team from 2012 that just got lucky?" The defensive collapse in the second half at Indy isn't going to help. That last win of 2013 is going to seem like decades ago by the time the 2014 season starts.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I think three things concern me about the Chiefs heading into next season:

1. The defense obviously isn't as good as everyone thought when they were shutting down cupcakes at the beginning of the year.

2. Andy Reid. I think he made some really questionable decisions heading down the stretch, including resting his starters in San Diego.

3. Finishing 2-6 after a 9-0 start will definitely have the players thinking heading into 2014. "Are we the 2-14 team from 2012 that just got lucky?" The defensive collapse in the second half at Indy isn't going to help. That last win of 2013 is going to seem like decades ago by the time the 2014 season starts.

Absolutely no concerns about the last two. As for the defense, I'll reserve judgment until we see what they do in the off-season.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

As I said on Saturday, Smith put up 30 points or more in 3 of his last 4 starts. The guy can score. He's not going to go out and throw for 400 yards and 4 touchdowns just because he can. Can he do that? Absolutely. But why do it if you don't have to?

His performance on Saturday was phenomenal. He threw for 378 yards and 4 TDs, with absolutely zero playmakers. Charles goes down in the first series. Avery had one big bomb before he went down. Dwayne Bowe is nothing more than a No. 2 wideout. He has no TE or other dependable receivers. Denver has five receivers better than anybody Kansas City has.

Smith is an outlier without a doubt. I think much of his lack of development his first five years in the league had a lot to do with age and completely dysfunctional coaching. Singletary and Nolan are horrible head coaches with no offensive common sense whatsoever. He went from the spread option in Utah to an Air Coryell offense in San Francisco with a different coordinator every season. It wasn't until Harbaugh came along that decided maybe he should tailor the offense to his QB. You almost have to disregard the first five years of his career.

I love Smith, and I admit I'm not sure I'd label him a franchise quarterback in the sense that he's a guy who can lead you to the playoffs almost every year for eight years. He's better than Cutler. I'd take him over Flacco and Romo too -- say what you will, but Alex Smith didn't lose a single game for his team this year.

I'm not sure the lesson to learn from Smith is that NFL teams need to give QBs more time and a longer leash than the lesson you need to get QBs doing what they're good at. Too many teams try to pound square pegs into round holes.

As I told you in the thread yesterday, the offense wasn't that great in 3 of those 4 games.

After the loss to Denver, KC scored 38, 28, 45, 56 points.

The San Diego 38 point explosion was their best regular season offensive game of the year. They played very well.

The 28 against Denver? 1 TD was on a kick return, the other on a 22 yard drive. Not very impressive against the Denver defense.

The 45 against Washinton? This included two returns for TD's and scoring drives of 13, 25 and 41 yards.

Against the Raiders, they had a return TD off an INT and drives of 11, 16, and 28 yards for TD's. Two other TD drives were under 50 yards.


I know your reaction is to say "that's all they needed and they damned well got it" OK, that's fine. Do you really think you can sustain yourself on 40 yard TD drives and return scores against winning football teams?

Now, the Alex Smith that played Saturday? Stunning. He was doing things he hasn't ever done. Accurate with deep passes. Smart decisions to run with the ball. Everything you want in a franchise QB. It was a beautiful display of quarterbacking and one he had not given all season long. This was a season high for passing yards, rushing yards, and passing TD's. It was second in yards per pass attempt.

For the Chiefs as a team it was the first time they had 30 first downs in a game, first time they hit 500 yards (only the 2nd they hit over 400), and also ranked as their 4th best rushing output of the season. This was on the road, without their best player and against a defense who had nailed him shut just a few weeks ago.

Does he get props for that? Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. He deserves tons of accolades for it. But until he shows he can do half of that against above average defenses, that's the anomaly, it isn't Alex Smith.

I don't hate Alex Smith, in face I just said you could win a Super Bowl with him. But is he a guy you throw out there and say "He'll get us 10 wins, even if we don't give him a running game, even if half our team is hurt, even if our WR are decimated, out defense is mediocre etc.) No, he isn't. Aaron Rodgers is. Peyton Manning. Tom Brady. Andrew Luck. Drew Brees.

Next year will be interesting for both Alex Smith and the Chiefs. Next year they will face some defenses. Seattle, San Fran, Arizona, and the Jets to name four. Play like he did Saturday in those games? I'll admit I was wrong about both the Chiefs and Alex Smith. Odds aren't good though. For starters, Smith isn't likely to become someone different now. Second, the Chiefs were remarkably healthy this year. something not likely to repeat itself next year Third, the schedule toughens up.

I would be stunned if KC were in the playoffs next year. If they are, you guys can grill up the crow and I'll show up fork in hand to down it.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I think three things concern me about the Chiefs heading into next season:

1. The defense obviously isn't as good as everyone thought when they were shutting down cupcakes at the beginning of the year.

2. Andy Reid. I think he made some really questionable decisions heading down the stretch, including resting his starters in San Diego.

3. Finishing 2-6 after a 9-0 start will definitely have the players thinking heading into 2014. "Are we the 2-14 team from 2012 that just got lucky?" The defensive collapse in the second half at Indy isn't going to help. That last win of 2013 is going to seem like decades ago by the time the 2014 season starts.

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Absolutely no concerns about the last two. As for the defense, I'll reserve judgment until we see what they do in the off-season.

"Really questionable decisions" has been synonymous with Andy Reid since early in his days in Philly, so I'm not sure why you would feel so confident in him.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Now, the Alex Smith that played Saturday? Stunning. He was doing things he hasn't ever done. Accurate with deep passes.

Well, except for the deep ball to Bowe that probably would have sealed the game...

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I don't hate Alex Smith, in face I just said you could win a Super Bowl with him. But is he a guy you throw out there and say "He'll get us 10 wins, even if we don't give him a running game, even if half our team is hurt, even if our WR are decimated, out defense is mediocre etc.) No, he isn't. Aaron Rodgers is. Peyton Manning. Tom Brady. Andrew Luck. Drew Brees.

.

I wouldn't put Luck in the Tom Brady/Peyton Manning/Drew Brees/Aaron Rodgers class yet. Wayyy too small a sample size. Otherwise you're saying that it should include such "small sample size" wonders as RGIII, Russell Wilson, Cam Newton (now some of these guys may belong in that class one day true, but it's far too early to tell on any of them IMO).

He's got a career 81.5 QB Rating after 2 seasons. That's below Cam Newton by like 5 points (to use just one example).

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I wouldn't put Luck in the Tom Brady/Peyton Manning/Drew Brees/Aaron Rodgers class yet. Wayyy too small a sample size. Otherwise you're saying that it should include such "small sample size" wonders as RGIII, Russell Wilson, Cam Newton (now some of these guys may belong in that class one day true, but it's far too early to tell on any of them IMO).

He's got a career 81.5 QB Rating after 2 seasons. That's below Cam Newton by like 5 points (to use just one example).

I agree with everything you say here. The only thing about Luck is that he seems to have ice water in his veins in the fourth quarter and I'm not sure I see that changing anytime soon. The guy simply doesn't give up on a game until the clock reaches triple zeroes.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

I wouldn't put Luck in the Tom Brady/Peyton Manning/Drew Brees/Aaron Rodgers class yet. Wayyy too small a sample size. Otherwise you're saying that it should include such "small sample size" wonders as RGIII, Russell Wilson, Cam Newton (now some of these guys may belong in that class one day true, but it's far too early to tell on any of them IMO).

He's got a career 81.5 QB Rating after 2 seasons. That's below Cam Newton by like 5 points (to use just one example).

Do you think the Colts, as constructed, would be anywhere near the playoffs without Luck? They have an average running game. Their defense is ranked 20th. Reggie Wayne went down in week 7. I'm sorry, but I believe Luck is there now with the wins.

Honestly, I think Russell is very close to being there or already there as well. Given all things being equal, I think these guys are just too good to let their teams go 6-10. If Luck didn't lose with the talent around him these last couple of years, I don't see it happening as he matures and gets better talent around him.