How Much Success Will Alex Smith Have as Chiefs QB?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Poll forthcoming.

[kcfanXIII]

I think he gets this team right back to around 7-9 to 9-7. I see it as a lateral move from cassel, i know there are some that disagree with this, but i'm done yelling at you and thinking less of you for it. I guess we'll just wait and see...

[Internet Tough Guy]

Originally Posted by Fish

What I see is a QB who couldn't do anything except barely manage the game for 5 seasons. Who had little to no success under 8 different coordinators. Who only managed improvement under Jim Harbaugh. Who's been ignored in free agency until the Chiefs. Who's "Improvement" years are still comparable to Matt Cassel.

If a guy can't do anything impressive under 8 different OCs, but looks adequate under 1 specific OC, logic dictates that the player is part of the problem and that 1 specific OC simply managed to work around the deficiencies. We heard the exact same shit about Cassel when they brought him in. And he proved to be exactly what we thought he was. Despite all the "Experts" saying otherwise for nearly the entire 4 years he played here.

It's not so much that his past scares me. It's that he doesn't excite me one single bit. There's nothing about him that gives me any hope for anything other than what we've been experiencing here for the last 40 years straight.

I don't hate Alex. He is what he is. I hate the fact that the Chiefs settled for Alex, and gave up valuable picks in the process.

Also... **** the idea of taking Joke Lueckel.

Manage what games??? The 49ers best receiver on there squad was Arnaz battle and where is he now?? The only receiver they had on there team until crabtree/morgan in 10' was Vernon davis and Frank gore. There entire O-Line has changed besides staley. There entire offense has changed since that teams suckage 2-14 team.. The kid had zero talent around him.

The main reason alex is gone from SF is because of there GM over there whose named Baalke. He stated over and over that he didnt want alex because he wanted a QB HE would draft. He knows that if alex succeeded that baalke really had nothing to do with it. He didnt draft him, he didnt coach him, so what glory does he get? He drafted Kaep.. He wanted Kaep in there. And harbaugh and baalke are close..

I think its pre-mature to throw alex into the dirty simply because our previous qb matt cassel sucked.. If your going to sit there and ignore the 20-5 season(s) NFC champ apperance, outhrows Brees and say alex had nothing to do with it and it was everyone around him, then ill sit there and say the previous years the suckage had nothing to do with him and the problems were everyone around him...

See? goes both ways.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Yeah, I don't buy that at all. As a matter of fact, it's clearly incorrect.

Sanchez led his team to two consecutive AFC Championship games and was one half away from the Super Bowl. Only Brian Schottenheimer's incompetence got in the way of a Jets Super Bowl appearance.

Since that second AFC Championship game appearance, Sanchez has regressed, big time. Schottenheimer was fired for Tony Sparano, who was also fired. If anything, the decline of Sanchez says more about the Jets and their coaching staff than it does about his inexperience coming out of USC because if that were truly an issue, his struggles would have occurred in Year One and Two, not years Three & Four.

You're a Sanchez homer. I get that.

Nothing he's done in his pro career has changed the opinion on him that I held back in early 2009: he hadn't shown enough in college to validate the risk. Because he was a one year starter in college. Period. End of story. I thought he had 2nd round value at best. I thought it would be nuts to take him anywhere earlier than the late first, I thought drafting him in the top 5 would be a huge mistake, and I thought the trade made for him was one of the worst ever.

And he didn't "lead" his team to anything. They carried him through that regular season into the playoffs despite one of the worst seasons by a rookie quarterback that I've ever seen. In the playoffs of January 2010 he played 2-4 solid quarters of ball and once again rode the running game and defense to wins. And the idea that he regressed? Maybe in 2012, when his completion percentage dropped back to his rookie levels. But aside from that, his 2010, 2011 and 2012 seasons all ended with more yardage, more TDs and fewer INTs. Of course he's still terrible, but he hasn't gotten markedly worse than he was as a rookie (hell, that's hardly possible...). He just hasn't gotten any better.

He's a bust, Dane. A monumental bust. We're talking a notch or two below Ryan Leaf levels of historic futility. I know that's hard to stomach. But that's reality. He was a bad gamble.

Anyway, I happen to think Geno Smith would have been a far better gamble. You're welcome to disagree with that, that's fine. I certainly wouldn't pretend to be some kind of expert or anything, that's just one guy's opinion. We'll see how it plays out.

I do know I'd rather gamble on the possibility of Geno being a franchise quarterback, however remote you want to make that, than accept the absolute certainty of what we get with Alex Smith, a guy who will never, ever be anything more than a middling game manager. But I don't get to make those decisions, and we're stuck with what we have.

[Mr. Laz]

I think we find a way to win a playoff game, probably W/C.

that's about it


I imagine it's more because of coaching than Alex Smith though.

[Internet Tough Guy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

I think we find a way to win a playoff game, probably W/C.

that's about it


I imagine it's more because of coaching than Alex Smith though.

loooooool. Casssell 2-14.. We get alex, Win playoff game, oh it was because of the coaching not because of the change of QB..

[Dixie Land]

Alex Smith....WHY OH WHY???? we need a REAL QB....good lord

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Makjuice

Manage what games??? The 49ers best receiver on there squad was Arnaz battle and where is he now?? The only receiver they had on there team until crabtree/morgan in 10' was Vernon davis and Frank gore. There entire O-Line has changed besides staley. There entire offense has changed since that teams suckage 2-14 team.. The kid had zero talent around him.

The main reason alex is gone from SF is because of there GM over there whose named Baalke. He stated over and over that he didnt want alex because he wanted a QB HE would draft. He knows that if alex succeeded that baalke really had nothing to do with it. He didnt draft him, he didnt coach him, so what glory does he get? He drafted Kaep.. He wanted Kaep in there. And harbaugh and baalke are close..

I think its pre-mature to throw alex into the dirty simply because our previous qb matt cassel sucked.. If your going to sit there and ignore the 20-5 season(s) NFC champ apperance, outhrows Brees and say alex had nothing to do with it and it was everyone around him, then ill sit there and say the previous years the suckage had nothing to do with him and the problems were everyone around him...

See? goes both ways.

Yeah, Alex Smith just needed more weapons. That excuse was pretty popular with Cassel apologists too. The poor guy just had no talent around him. Well... bullshit. Good QBs make those around them better. Their performance isn't directly determined by those around them. Because that's indication that they're not a positive influence on their team. It indicates that they're very dependent on those around them. Which isn't a quality of a franchise QB.

And save the poor ol' mean GM against Alex Smith theory. That's laughable. GMs like winners, and those who improve their team. It's dependent on Smith's on field performance, not some imagined personal matter.

The only change in Alex Smith's performance is directly related to Jim Harbaugh. Who also gave up on him and traded him away.

[Molitoth]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

You're a Sanchez homer. I get that.

Nothing he's done in his pro career has changed the opinion on him that I held back in early 2009: he hadn't shown enough in college to validate the risk. Because he was a one year starter in college. Period. End of story. I thought he had 2nd round value at best. I thought it would be nuts to take him anywhere earlier than the late first, I thought drafting him in the top 5 would be a huge mistake, and I thought the trade made for him was one of the worst ever.

And he didn't "lead" his team to anything. They carried him through that regular season into the playoffs despite one of the worst seasons by a rookie quarterback that I've ever seen. In the playoffs of January 2010 he played 2-4 solid quarters of ball and once again rode the running game and defense to wins. And the idea that he regressed? Maybe in 2012, when his completion percentage dropped back to his rookie levels. But aside from that, his 2010, 2011 and 2012 seasons all ended with more yardage, more TDs and fewer INTs. Of course he's still terrible, but he hasn't gotten markedly worse than he was as a rookie (hell, that's hardly possible...). He just hasn't gotten any better.

He's a bust, Dane. A monumental bust. We're talking a notch or two below Ryan Leaf levels of historic futility. I know that's hard to stomach. But that's reality. He was a bad gamble.

Anyway, I happen to think Geno Smith would have been a far better gamble. You're welcome to disagree with that, that's fine. I certainly wouldn't pretend to be some kind of expert or anything, that's just one guy's opinion. We'll see how it plays out.

I do know I'd rather gamble on the possibility of Geno being a franchise quarterback, however remote you want to make that, than accept the absolute certainty of what we get with Alex Smith, a guy who will never, ever be anything more than a middling game manager. But I don't get to make those decisions, and we're stuck with what we have.

Excellent post.

It's nice that Geno Smith has 3 seasons of experience too. I'm always skeptical of QB's with 1 year of experience.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

You're a Sanchez homer. I get that.

While I preferred Sanchez to Cassel in 2009, I've stated several times in the past six months that the end result would have undoubtedly been the same: Fired coach, fired GM and the need for a new starting QB.

But homer? No. I preferred him to Cassel, especially when Cassel struggled in 2009 but "homer" is not an accurate description.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

He's a bust, Dane. A monumental bust. We're talking a notch or two below Ryan Leaf levels of historic futility. I know that's hard to stomach. But that's reality. He was a bad gamble.

I agree that he's been a bust but Ryan Leaf? No. That's overly dramatic. The guy by all accounts is a good citizen and teammate. When the Jets move on from him, he'll likely be a backup somewhere in the league and finished with a fairly undistinguished career. But Ryan Leaf? Nah, no way.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Anyway, I happen to think Geno Smith would have been a far better gamble. You're welcome to disagree with that, that's fine. I certainly wouldn't pretend to be some kind of expert or anything, that's just one guy's opinion. We'll see how it plays out.

That's your opinion. I don't have an opinion. I thought that Smith looked decent at the Combines, which was really my first chance to watch him outside of the K-State game and the Pinstripe Bowl. I watched some YouTube videos this past week in which I saw a lot of inconsistencies. But my opinion is neither here nor there. Reid and Dorsey clearly didn't like him at #1 (or any of this year's QB prospects), so it's out of my control.

I will say that I didn't "love" the guy, like so many here, so seeing them move past him isn't big "emotional" journey for me. Whatever happens to his career is inconsequential because clearly, he's not going to be a Chief.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I do know I'd rather gamble on the possibility of Geno being a franchise quarterback, however remote you want to make that, than accept the absolute certainty of what we get with Alex Smith, a guy who will never, ever be anything more than a middling game manager. But I don't get to make those decisions, and we're stuck with what we have.

I find it very curious that people are upset about the Alex Smith trade, as if he's the only QB on the horizon for the Chiefs in the next five years. It's bizarre.

Dorsey and Reid both have documented histories and drafting and developing QB's, whether it's Brunnel, Hasselbeck, Brooks or Rodgers to Kolb, Feeley, etc.

Trading for Alex Smith only insures ONE thing: The Chiefs will enter the 2013 season with an experienced veteran QB, something that does not exist on this roster.

Trading for Smith does not preclude the Chiefs from taking a developmental QB in the 2013 draft, nor does it preclude them from taking a QB next year. All it does is insure that they have a starting QB in place to begin the 2013 season.

[Internet Tough Guy]

Originally Posted by Fish

Yeah, Alex Smith just needed more weapons. That excuse was pretty popular with Cassel apologists too. The poor guy just had no talent around him. Well... bullshit. Good QBs make those around them better. Their performance isn't directly determined by those around them. Because that's indication that they're not a positive influence on their team. It indicates that they're very dependent on those around them. Which isn't a quality of a franchise QB.

And save the poor ol' mean GM against Alex Smith theory. That's laughable. GMs like winners, and those who improve their team. It's dependent on Smith's on field performance, not some imagined personal matter.

The only change in Alex Smith's performance is directly related to Jim Harbaugh. Who also gave up on him and traded him away.

the 49ers had the worst ranked O-line from 04-08. Period. End of story. Go back to rounds 1-2 and find out how many O-lineman they drafted in the 1st round for the following 5 years.... I wont beat a dead horse with you to point out the obvious.. AKA the 49ers have 4 1st round O-lineman on there team.

And the GM theory?? Uhm.. Raiders fired there HC after al davis died because why? What was the HC's reason? "The GM, They want there own HC, thats how it is in the NFL". Google is your friend.. Its the same with QB's. If you cant read between the lines and are blind then thats on you but you obviousley dont have a clue on how the nfl works... Why would a GM want to win a superbowl that he didnt draft or trade for ? A qb he just inherited from someone else?? Again.. GM's want QB's they trade for or draft. Period end of story again.

Andy reid is high on alex.. Are you a better evelauator and coach than andy reid? Are you? yeah. thats what i thought. Your a waiste of time.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

While I preferred Sanchez to Cassel in 2009, I've stated several times in the past six months that the end result would have undoubtedly been the same: Fired coach, fired GM and the need for a new starting QB.

But homer? No. I preferred him to Cassel, especially when Cassel struggled in 2009 but "homer" is not an accurate description.



I agree that he's been a bust but Ryan Leaf? No. That's overly dramatic. The guy by all accounts is a good citizen and teammate. When the Jets move on from him, he'll likely be a backup somewhere in the league and finished with a fairly undistinguished career. But Ryan Leaf? Nah, no way.



That's your opinion. I don't have an opinion. I thought that Smith looked decent at the Combines, which was really my first chance to watch him outside of the K-State game and the Pinstripe Bowl. I watched some YouTube videos this past week in which I saw a lot of inconsistencies. But my opinion is neither here nor there. Reid and Dorsey clearly didn't like him at #1 (or any of this year's QB prospects), so it's out of my control.

I will say that I didn't "love" the guy, like so many here, so seeing them move past him isn't big "emotional" journey for me. Whatever happens to his career is inconsequential because clearly, he's not going to be a Chief.



I find it very curious that people are upset about the Alex Smith trade, as if he's the only QB on the horizon for the Chiefs in the next five years. It's bizarre.

Dorsey and Reid both have documented histories and drafting and developing QB's, whether it's Brunnel, Hasselbeck, Brooks or Rodgers to Kolb, Feeley, etc.

Trading for Alex Smith only insures ONE thing: The Chiefs will enter the 2013 season with an experienced veteran QB, something that does not exist on this roster.

Trading for Smith does not preclude the Chiefs from taking a developmental QB in the 2013 draft, nor does it preclude them from taking a QB next year. All it does is insure that they have a starting QB in place to begin the 2013 season.

I can agree with this post. Pretty spot on...they announce an extension and I'll be livid.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Makjuice

the 49ers had the worst ranked O-line from 04-08. Period. End of story. Go back to rounds 1-2 and find out how many O-lineman they drafted in the 1st round for the following 5 years.... I wont beat a dead horse with you to point out the obvious.. AKA the 49ers have 4 1st round O-lineman on there team.

And the GM theory?? Uhm.. Raiders fired there HC after al davis died because why? What was the HC's reason? "The GM, They want there own HC, thats how it is in the NFL". Google is your friend.. Its the same with QB's. If you cant read between the lines and are blind then thats on you but you obviousley dont have a clue on how the nfl works... Why would a GM want to win a superbowl that he didnt draft or trade for ? A qb he just inherited from someone else?? Again.. GM's want QB's they trade for or draft. Period end of story again.

Andy reid is high on alex.. Are you a better evelauator and coach than andy reid? Are you? yeah. thats what i thought. Your a waiste of time.

.... now you're floundering. Good QBs succeed behind bad OLines all the time. Bad QBs make OLines look much worse than they are. You're doing everything possible to avoid faulting Smith for anything. It's his WRs. It's his OLine. It's his coordinators and coaches. It's his GM. That's just a quick summary from your last few posts.

Why would a GM want to win a Superbowl with a QB he inherited? Is that seriously a question? Did you really just type that out?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Fish

Yeah, Alex Smith just needed more weapons. That excuse was pretty popular with Cassel apologists too. The poor guy just had no talent around him. Well... bullshit.

Did you watch any of the 49ers games, outside of possibly the 2010 games against the Chiefs?

If so, you'd see that he DID make players like Vernon Davis "better". Michael Crabtree was far behind in his development due to missing the first half of the 2009 season. Their other wide receivers were pure dogshit, which is why in 2012, they signed Mario Manningham and Randy Moss, plus drafted a WR in the first round of the draft.

It was an issue, they 49ers KNEW it was an issue, so to pretend like it was Smith's fault for not elevating the play of shit WR's is just plain nonsense.

Originally Posted by Fish

And save the poor ol' mean GM against Alex Smith theory. That's laughable. GMs like winners, and those who improve their team. It's dependent on Smith's on field performance, not some imagined personal matter.

The 49ers chose to stick with Smith as their starter even after the hiring of Harbaugh and the selection of Kaepernick in 2011. Why? Because he gave them their best chance to win, and he DID win in 2011 and 2012.

But what head coach doesn't want their own guy to play? Kaepernick is a freak. He's a dual threat player that can throw a 50 yard pass in air or run for a 50 yard TD. EVERYONE that followed the 49ers felt it was only a matter of time before Kaepernick was starting.

That wasn't an indictment of Smith, it was an endorsement of Kaepernick.

Originally Posted by Fish

The only change in Alex Smith's performance is directly related to Jim Harbaugh. Who also gave up on him and traded him away.

This is nonsense. Smith showed plenty of flashes over the years but he had a difference OC every year before Harbaugh arrived on the scene. And it wasn't like those offensive coordinators ran the same scheme. He went from WCO, to Coryell to who knows what to Jimmy ****ing Raye and so on.

Alex Smith will be a competent QB in KC. Will he win a playoff game? Who knows? Will he win a Super Bowl? Who knows? But he's definitely capable of winning a playoff game and he's definitely a capable starter, which is more than I can say for Cassel or Quinn or Palko or Thigpen or Croyle.

[Molitoth]

Originally Posted by Peyton's Princess

I can agree with this post. Pretty spot on...they announce an extension and I'll be livid.

lol bullshit. You will accept it and think of another excuse to provide more hope.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Trading for Smith does not preclude the Chiefs from taking a developmental QB in the 2013 draft, nor does it preclude them from taking a QB next year. All it does is insure that they have a starting QB in place to begin the 2013 season.

I've been reading through all this, and that is my conclusion as well. I realize that some people here are reactionary to the extreme, but it seems logical to just be patient. I see nothing that makes me believe that trading for Alex Smith is mutually-exclusive of also drafting a QB (even with the first pick).

Than again, I'm an idiot when it comes to football. Maybe I should be running around screaming or using too much ketchup with my steak fries.