ESPN NFL

Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando

Travis from Boise writes: Sando - as always love the blog. I'd just like to be the first to say the 49ers' QB controversy is over. Now it will be the majority of the summer before it's declared for political reasons but the starter will be Shaun Hill. I admit bias to being a Hill fan since he replaced Dilfer two years ago but here's my logic.

Last week in Coach Sing's chat on NFL.com the thing he said regarding the competition was along the lines of, 'ultimately the team will tell who the starter is, I will just confirm it.'

The biggest thing Shaun has going for him is the 'it' factor, the ability to lead the team to victory, and that comes from his leadership and team chemistry. On the official website the latest version of the 'Joe Show' Staley's ridiculous video blog; you get insight into all of this.

Hill cameos often and gets along with the other players. Alex Smith appears for the last minute or so and let's just say it speaks for itself. He lacks the ability to bring people together and the respect of the team; the team knows it and I daresay Singletary knows it. Wait and see, Hill will start despite the media downplaying it because he's not the prototypical guy, but if he's the man who can lead the team to victory, he's the guy I want.

Mike Sando: Mike Singletary's history says he will value the "it" factor a great deal. He knows from his playing days what a quarterback's psychological makeup means to a team.

As Singletary put it in the chat you referenced:

"Leadership is extremely important. Credibility at that position in terms of his teammates knowing, 'This is the guy.' I won't really have to choose the guy, the huddle will choose the guy by the way they respond to the quarterback. The way the receivers respond to the quarterback and the way the defense asks questions of the quarterback. The team will really decide the quarterback. I'll just make the confirmation.

But if Alex Smith keeps the competition close, I do think the organization will face a dilemma. The 49ers might be tempted to go with Smith under such a scenario, but Singletary will indeed have to anticipate what effect any decision might have on the locker room. It could be tough for him to justify going with Smith if Smith doesn't clearly win the job.

The video you referenced -- good luck pulling a link, but if you have one, please pass along -- contains a brief exchange between Joe Staley and Smith. There's little context and I wouldn't make a quarterback decision based on anything there. J.T. O'Sullivan was the scrappy and self-assured fighter last season.

The most mysterious aspect of this quarterback situation, at least to me, centers around what happened to the Alex Smith everyone thought they knew. The Scouts Inc. profile on Smith called him "as good as it gets from an intangibles standpoint" and said he was "an outstanding leader both in terms of vocally and by example." The report said Smith had "terrific pocket presence" and "reminds us of a young Brett Favre -- shows some elusiveness and a lot of toughness as a runner."

Pro Football Weekly's Nolan Nawrocki called Smith an "excellent leader" before concluding that he "has all the tools around which to build a franchise. The same type of mind as Peyton Manning with the intangibles that make a good quarterback great."

Did that guy never exist? If he did, can he be salvaged? I do not think a guy with those qualities loses them altogether after a few tough seasons. Smith needs to enjoy some success, get a couple breaks with injuries and feel good about playing football again.

---

Steve from Mesa, Ariz., writes: Hey Mike, when is this Anquan Boldin soap opera going to end? Now, with the draft over is it still possible for the Cardinals to trade him at all, and if so, get equal value in return? Maybe a straight up trade for Terrell Suggs or Julius Peppers? If not, I think the Cardinals should make him honor the contract he signed.

Mike Sando: The Cardinals appear quite capable of fulfilling the last part of your question. Boldin's agent sounds optimistic when he says Boldin will be traded before training camp. Here are some factors that could work against trading Boldin:

• The team has invested $23 million in Kurt Warner for the next two seasons. Now might not be the time to trade away a Pro Bowl receiver.
• Boldin has shown he'll show up and play well during the season. He isn't going to be a problem from September through the end of the season, most likely. That increases his value to the Cardinals.
  
• Any draft choice the Cardinals would receive at this point would be for 2010. That significantly diminishes the value of what Arizona might receive in return.
• The public seems to be backing the Cardinals on this one. While no team should make major moves solely from a public-relations standpoint, the Cardinals might incur more criticism for trading Boldin than for keeping him.
• Any team acquiring Boldin would have to satisfy him financially. Boldin is a very physical receiver. He puts his body at risk. He probably has higher miles than the typical 28-year-old receiver. If the Cardinals aren't willing to pay Larry Fitzgerald money to Boldin, who else is going to pay that kind of money?

---

William from parts unknown writes: I predict that Lofa Tatupu will make it back [to the Pro Bowl], and bring Curry with him. He (Curry) already has the notoriety of his peers and the fans, which equals votes. I think John Carlson has an decent shot. Kellen Winslow could overtake him if he can stay healthy and Jason Witten is always the top in the NFC. I will be almost shocked is Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie doesn't make it. In my opinion he can already be mentioned as arguably the best CB in the league.

Mike Sando: Best in the league already? Oakland has a pretty good one in Nnamdi Asomugha. Carlson will have to catch lots and lots of passes to break through, and with Tony Gonzalez in the NFC this season, the odds are longer.

---

Will from Tallahassee writes: With the recent roster cut (Pisa Tinoisamoa), how possible do you think it will be for the Rams to make a play at one of the more established receivers still available? And with such a move, wouldn't be safe to say that the Rams could be one of the sleeper teams in 09?

Mike Sando: The hard part is naming an established, available receiver that will help a team significantly in 2009. The Jaguars signed the best one they could find and it was Torry Holt. That tells you the challenge facing the Rams as they try to upgrade that position.

---

Rio from Bellingham, Wash., writes: Mike, I was just wondering if the Seahawks still plan to use Leroy Hill more like they used Julian Peterson? I haven't read much about how things are lining up during the camps and what not, but then again I just haven't been reading much. We learned his rookie year that Hill can get to the QB, so I'm just hoping to see some blind-side hits by Hill.

Mike Sando: Not even the Seattle players are sure at this point how things will shake out at linebacker in terms of specific roles. I tend to think the Seahawks will attempt to make better use of Hill as a pass rusher. Aaron Curry's ability to handle assignments in coverage should differentiate him from Hill and Julian Peterson. That could, in theory, free up Hill. I'll believe it when I see it given that Hill hasn't been a pass rusher since 2005.

---

Charlie from Lexington writes: Hey Mike, All this talk about the 49ers having two #1 picks next year. Maybe they use one to trade for a qb or olb, but my question is what if Shaun Hill has that pro bowl year? Do they still trade for a top qb? What is Haralson or Lawson has that 10+ sack year? Do they still sign, draft, trade for a big name rusher?

Mike Sando: Developments such as the ones you mentioned would certainly alter the ways in which the 49ers might consider using that extra choice. Hill wouldn't even have to achieve Pro Bowl status. A strong season from him and a winning record would give the 49ers enough confidence in him to feel better about his longer-term prospects.

---

Rob from San Francisco writes: You recently wrote: "The 49ers probably will not improve dramatically from their 7-9 record even if they are a more consistent team, which I expect them to be." Why are you always so down on the 49ers?

Let's say they become a more consistent team. Let's just say they had been a more consistent team last season for instance. They just might have scored a touchdown from the 1-yard line at the end of the game against the Cardinals in week 10, which means they would have ended the season tied with the Cardinals for first place. I'm not sure what the tiebreaker would be.

Now let's just say that level of consistency also would have allowed the 49ers to score on the final drive against the Dolphins last season. They would've won that game too. Making their record 9-7 and they would've won the division. They also lost some early games due to bonehead plays, such as the Eagles and Cardinals in week one. My point is, the 49ers were pretty close to being division champs.

Real close, yet you say even with improved consistency they will not improve on their record. I highly disagree with you on that, and I don't see how you can assume that. If they improve consistency, they go 9-7 and beat the Cards at least one game and they go to the playoffs. Am I wrong?

Also, you have to take into account the inspired play of late last season. Had they had Singletary from the beginning, there's no way they would've lost to the Cardinals, Eagles or Pats for that matter. I think you give the Cardinals a little bit too much credit for barely making the playoffs, and then riding a hot streak into the Super Bowl. You should see if the Cards can sustain a high level of play for a full season before crowning them perennial diviison champions.

As far as the Seahawks go, if the 49ers were in their position you wouldn't give them a chance in hell. Yet the Seahawks get good marks and fresh optimism. I think you're a little too fond of them from the days when you were their beat writer. You need to let those feelings go, as well as your dislike of the 49ers, and I think you will start to see that the 49ers are actually the favorites of the division this season.

Mike Sando: My comment reflected the fact that 7-9 is a good record relative to the records Seattle and St. Louis posted last season. As a result, the 49ers could become more consistent without improving their record significantly. Were they to go 9-7, I would not consider that to be "dramatic" improvement from 7-9.

Playing the what-if game with a team's record from the last season works both ways. Fans tend to be more willing to move close defeats into the win column than they are willing to move close victories into the defeat column. If you're a 49ers fan, then, you might be more inclined to slide that road defeat to Arizona into the win column, but less likely to slide close road victories over the Seahawks and Rams into the loss column. The results become skewed.

---

Jason from parts unknown writes: Hey Mike. Love your blog. I know that everybody thinks that the Niners didn't get a pass rusher this draft, but if everybody paid attention last year, then they should know that the Niners were never really in that many blitz packages last year. Until Manny, Parys, Patrick, and Takeo are used in them, don't you think we should hold off on grading their pass-rushing capabilities? Also, what's your take on Nate Davis, who I consider to be the biggest steal of this year's draft?

Mike Sando: Yes, we can hold off on fully analyzing the team's pass-rush ability. The question becomes whether the team can afford to wait and see. Every team feels as though it could use another pass rusher. The 49ers will want more pass-rush help even if they have some success with their blitz packages. As for Nate Davis, I like the fact that he's coming into the league with something to prove. He should have a chip on his shoulder (in a good way) after hearing so much about the learning disability, which may or may not affect him much.

---

Oz from Ft. Lauderdale writes: Does Boldin and new 2nd round draft pick Cody Brown (are there any rules that we can't trade him yet?) for the disgruntled Arizona native Terrell Suggs just make too much sense to happen? Both teams would be filling needs, getting rid of disgruntled guys, to teams that both want them. Unfortunately, since Champ for Portis this kind of stuff never happens in the NFL.

Mike Sando: Your final sentence answers the question, but I'll add a couple other thoughts. This one makes more sense than some other Boldin scenarios in that the Ravens have at least show an interest in him. But if the Ravens really wanted Brown, they could have drafted him with the 57th overall choice. They selected another outside linebacker, Paul Kruger, instead. The Cardinals then drafted Brown in the 63rd spot.