I see. Stafford gets a pass for bad coaching in his career but Smith doesn't.

Got it.

It is OK that you don't get it and you never will. The stat will continue to be a telling indicator with or without you.

Giving up more than 24 points to an opponent is a real indicator and it neither meaningless or arbitrary. You are just being hard-headed and refusing to see it because you have already made your call and now you can't back down.

The laughable thing is that you even admit the Chiefs scored more than 25 points per game in an 11-5 year. Which is what you would expect -- something north of 8-8 if you are scoring more than 25 points a game and/or holding opponents to under 24 points. You are making my case.

What part of we gave up 34 points per game avg in the losses do you not understand?

You don't read my posts. I've stated that Alex was ruined by bad coaching.

I've stated that you would think the 49ers would have protected a $50 million investment in a rookie, but did not. You bet your ass Alex suffered from wretched QB development until the day Jim Harbaugh first taught him footwork at his first practice.

I would still take Stafford over Alex, but he needs a top coach to develop him. Stafford would be the new Gannon if he went to any team that had the ability to develop him as a QB should be developed. RGIII is beginning down the same road because Snyder is another clueless moron for an owner.

Imagine RGIII going to Sean Payton. He would be well on his way toward elite status.

You are the one who said 24 points is a meaningless arbitrary number. WTF are you talking about 34 point totals for?

I've made the case that 24 points is the area where, if you score more you are likely to win games, if you score less you are likely to lose games. You can't isolate lopsided losses and then analyze that as a trend.

OK, as a trend, when your Defense gives up 34 or more YOU ALMOST ALWAYS LOSE. PERIOD.

There is another fact for you.

The thing is, a forum member was spouting records based on when opponents score more than 24 points. You and some others called that meaningless. It is NOT meaningless, and I've showed you why it is not meaningless.

So if you win 6-3, that is an outlier, but it doesn't void the overall trend that in MOST games, if you score more than 24 or hold opponents to under 24, you GENERALLY win.

I don't care if you gave up 34 or 94 points in your losses. The trend is the trend. It is why the metric of 24 points you call "meaningless" is valuable, not meaningless.

It is meaningless when we are discussing Alex Smith and the Chiefs.

The post I was responding to was Clay said we were 1-6 in games we gave up 24 points in last year.

He missed the fact Smith didn't start in the SD game. So Smith lost 5 games last season as a starter.

We gave up 34 points a game in those loses on average and scored over 25.

Everything I stated was accurate, 24 points is not relative to the discussion we were having.

OK. Thank you for clarifying the specific conditions you were discussing. I will butt out.

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2...hill-shock.gif

Dude, I'm one of the few that is with you on most things AS, but no ****ing way here.

I do think that if Romo traded places with Smith on those later 49ers teams Smith had I think they would have won a SB.

Dallas for whatever reason cannot field a complete team at any given point, either their defense is good and their offense is mostly garbage, or their offense gets better and then their defense gets old and degrades. It's weird.

I don't think romo would of beaten the giants with that 49er team. The giants were in a different planet than all the teams they beat that year. He prolly beats the ravens though

Romo's one of those guys that if he plays his game, he can be good for 4 td's easy. I would like to see what he would do if he had a complete team around him for a change, but then again **** Dallas so whatever. Romo just catches a ton of shit down here even though he is a 30-35 td/year Qb.

Clay is a secret Cassell fan..always knew it

Stafford is what Tyler Bray could be at best. Rocket armed QB without much of a football IQ.

Dalton
Cutler
Palmer
Romo
Ryan
Geno

I've never seen any of these QB's will their team or carry them in any way. They've all sucked or done nothing. Hell Kaepernick can't even beat a solid defense without help from his defense/offensive line.

Alex showed in Indy that he can be more than a game manager.

I still can't believe the pass that Romo gets with the fans. The guy is hot garbage and yet people still think he's awesome as fresh apple pie. The ****ing guy has screwed the pooch more times than you can count, and as Scottfree said, his been given ass tons of weapons during his time in Dallas. The guy can't get over the hump and, by the very definition of the CP QB experts, is dog shit because he can't win a playoff game.

He's a stat thrower. That's it.

But he banged Jessica Simpson and he golfs. So I love the guy.

Yeah