Something I could probably believe if it weren't for the fact that a)he lead his team to a 13-3 record and 3 points of a superbowl the year prior and b)he lead the league in completion percentage and qb rating prior to injury
I'm not saying he's the second coming and he might not be the answer, but I don't think there's one out there that's a better option.

I do believe we should pick a qb, I don't think there's a plug and play out there.

He's already been named a million times. Jim Plunkett.

Someone could easily say tell me a black QB who has won a Superbowl and name only Doug Williams when talking about Geno. Actually, he fits the first also.

Alex Smith sucks, but make better points.

I ****ing love your qualifiers. What does it matter that he was traded for? Brees would be a free agent who won with a new team, except Diego was too stupid to get anything for him?

Jim Plunkett wasn't traded for. He was a free agent when the Raiders acquired him.

Ummmm.... NO at least not a complete deep ball to his own receiver.

It's never happened before. That kind of matters, dipshit.

Who cares if there is a plug and play? This team isn't winning anything anyway next year.

Besides, no QB who threw for as few yards and TDs as Smith led his team to anything. He didn't steer the season into the ditch. He was also a bigger reason why they lost the NFCCG than Kyle Williams.

Finally, there might not be a better QB in a vacuum than Smith this year, but essentially you are making the same argument that you decry others for by intimating we have to take a QB. We had options:

1) Draft a QB with 1.1
2) Draft a QB with 2.34
3) Draft a QB with a high pick and sign a vet backup
4) Sign a vet starter
5) Trade for a vet starter

We chose the worst of all options. We could have signed Matt Moore and still had flexibility in this or next year's draft. Now, we've hamstrung ourselves at 1.1, we don't have 2.34, and we're going to lose our 2nd or 3rd rounder next year.

I'm a dipshit that you're including an irrelevant method of acquisition? That you spend countless hours looking up misleading, irrelevant facts?

Here's a question: What possible ****ing difference in the entire scope of the earth, moon, sun and any other aspect of the solar system does it make whether a quarterback was traded for or released to find his own home? How does that affect his game in the slightest?

It's not irrelevant.

Teams don't generally trade away QBs with Super-Bowl winning potential. Think about it.

So he was less desired than Alex Smith and won 2. Not sure what being traded has to do with it when the point is the same. There are guys that are left for dead that turn around their careers.

It's ok to say its likely not to happen, and I agree with. However, shit happens.

When you have to point to 1983 to make your case, please **** the hell off.

I agree. Keep buying lottery tickets until you scratch one off. You are never going to buy a house with the $5 you spend anyway.

Option 3 was ideal.

How about Kurt Warner playing ****ing arena league? The point is there are no absolutes in life.

There are no black QBs from West Virginia that have ever won a SuperBowl.

I'm not arguing with what you are saying your points just mean shit.

Do we have absolute confirmation of the terms of the deal yet? For what it's worth, my preferred method would be 4 than 2.

Like I said I don't agree with all, but we did sign a vet starter and maybe, just maybe we can come out with a qb of the future.