Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Originally posted by Franchise408:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:
Um yes they did

They did?

Alex Smith was 6 minutes shy of winning a Super Bowl in Kansas City?

Maaan, I must have been working on that Super Bowl Sunday.

Either that, or you guys are cherry picking one part of a statement instead of reading the whole thing.

Originally posted by Franchise408:
My opinion that the obsession with finding a replacement for a QB that took you within approx. 6 minutes of a Super Bowl championship - and giving up *numerous* future draft picks to do it - is absurd.

My opinion is that wasting a roster that is built to *compete now* for the development of one guy, to replace 1 other guy who is good enough to take the team to a competitive level - is absurd.

My opinion is that - yes, if you are going to replace a quarterback with an overwhelmingly winning record, who has taken you to a Super Bowl and a 2nd NFC Championship game appearance (and was about 6 minutes shy of a 2nd Super Bowl appearance in 3 years), then yes, that QB coming in needs to be significantly better on day 1.

Because if not, if the new guy *isn't* better on day 1, what was the point? Because in the time you're spending to develop him, the other 52 players on the roster are wasting their prime years away without competing.

That's horrible roster building design.

And miss me with the "Jimmy fan" b.s. Jimmy is far from irreplaceable, and last night was a trash performance from him.

The whole point is the *team*, and the team is not better off by sacrificing what you have at the position NOW for something you might have at the position LATER, when the rest of the team is ready to compete NOW, not built to compete LATER.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Stop looking for a reason why the situations are different. The Chiefs traded just as much as we did to replace the QB of a team that just went 12-4 and won the division. There is not a cherry picking factor to this at all. Its literally the same thing. The Chiefs traded away a bunch to replace the QB of a team that won a ton of regular season games and couldnt close the deal in the playoffs. Thats exactly what we did.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Stop looking for a reason why the situations are different. The Chiefs traded just as much as we did to replace the QB of a team that just went 12-4 and won the division. There is not a cherry picking factor to this at all. Its literally the same thing. The Chiefs traded away a bunch to replace the QB of a team that won a ton of regular season games and couldnt close the deal in the playoffs. Thats exactly what we did.

It's similar. Up until the events of year 2 for the QBs involved. KC got some sort of Favre, Elway, Stafford, Marino, McNabb hybrid. We got the second coming of Tim Tebow.

Basically aside from that it's the exact same situation. I see no difference.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Stop looking for a reason why the situations are different. The Chiefs traded just as much as we did to replace the QB of a team that just went 12-4 and won the division. There is not a cherry picking factor to this at all. Its literally the same thing. The Chiefs traded away a bunch to replace the QB of a team that won a ton of regular season games and couldnt close the deal in the playoffs. Thats exactly what we did.

It's similar. Up until the events of year 2 for the QBs involved. KC got some sort of Favre, Elway, Stafford, Marino, McNabb hybrid. We got the second coming of Tim Tebow.

Basically aside from that it's the exact same situation. I see no difference.

Who we picked and who the Chiefs picked isnt the point. The situations are almost identical.

The Chiefs thought they maxed out with how far they could go with Alex Smith, and traded two 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick to move up and draft Mahomes.

The 49ers thought they maxed out how far we could go with Jimmy G, and traded two 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick to move up and draft Lance.

Originally posted by Franchise408:

Originally posted by Waterbear:
Funny because I'm assuming both of you were okay with giving Trey no reps last season. The opinion that he must be an upgrade with no game reps is absurd.

My opinion that the obsession with finding a replacement for a QB that took you within approx. 6 minutes of a Super Bowl championship - and giving up *numerous* future draft picks to do it - is absurd.

My opinion is that wasting a roster that is built to *compete now* for the development of one guy, to replace 1 other guy who is good enough to take the team to a competitive level - is absurd.

My opinion is that - yes, if you are going to replace a quarterback with an overwhelmingly winning record, who has taken you to a Super Bowl and a 2nd NFC Championship game appearance (and was about 6 minutes shy of a 2nd Super Bowl appearance in 3 years), then yes, that QB coming in needs to be significantly better on day 1.

Because if not, if the new guy *isn't* better on day 1, what was the point? Because in the time you're spending to develop him, the other 52 players on the roster are wasting their prime years away without competing.

That's horrible roster building design.

And miss me with the "Jimmy fan" b.s. Jimmy is far from irreplaceable, and last night was a trash performance from him.

The whole point is the *team*, and the team is not better off by sacrificing what you have at the position NOW for something you might have at the position LATER, when the rest of the team is ready to compete NOW, not built to compete LATER.

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Boy were they cheatin' on the short stuff... My God Man.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Stop looking for a reason why the situations are different. The Chiefs traded just as much as we did to replace the QB of a team that just went 12-4 and won the division. There is not a cherry picking factor to this at all. Its literally the same thing. The Chiefs traded away a bunch to replace the QB of a team that won a ton of regular season games and couldnt close the deal in the playoffs. Thats exactly what we did.

It's similar. Up until the events of year 2 for the QBs involved. KC got some sort of Favre, Elway, Stafford, Marino, McNabb hybrid. We got the second coming of Tim Tebow.

Basically aside from that it's the exact same situation. I see no difference.

Who we picked and who the Chiefs picked isnt the point. The situations are almost identical.

The Chiefs thought they maxed out with how far they could go with Alex Smith, and traded two 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick to move up and draft Mahomes.

The 49ers thought they maxed out how far we could go with Jimmy G, and traded two 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick to move up and draft Lance.

You are likely correct. Mahomes is irrelevant. What matters is we are following that model. KS should put that on his HOF bust. Followed KC model they used on Mahomes. Does it matter how TL turns out.. probably not. Good point.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
The condescending reply isnt appreciated. This isnt about how anything turns out. This is about doing the exact same thing, which the poster claimed was not the case.

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
The condescending reply isnt appreciated. This isnt about how anything turns out. This is about doing the exact same thing, which the poster claimed was not the case.

Why do you think they were doing the exact same thing? Cuz they wanted different results than KC? They wanted a FQB on an elite level..

Originally posted by Afrikan:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Boy were they cheatin' on the short stuff... My God Man.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
The condescending reply isnt appreciated. This isnt about how anything turns out. This is about doing the exact same thing, which the poster claimed was not the case.

Why do you think they were doing the exact same thing? Cuz they wanted different results than KC? They wanted a FQB on an elite level..

Because both teams were tired of QB play that wasnt good enough. Simple.