Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

If you ever want to go unnoticed just sit next to Jimmy G

-Kyle Shanahan

Originally posted by picklejuice:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
I did not post that. Nor have I seen anyone use his looks as an excuse for poor play. Even Jimmy's strongest defenders admit when he plays poorly or mades bad throws (like the one against KC). There is NO counterexample to the handful of extreme Jimmy haters that say he sucks, is carried, etc. NO ONE is saying the opposite and that he's elite, carries the team, is the only reason we're winning, etc. The extremism comes from one side only.

Ncommand has been doing that very thing. Saying Jimmy carried Kyle Sunday.

He did. Jimmy saved Kyle with the first td drive. If he doesn't make those plays down 13-3 the game would have spiraled. That drive saved Kyle's ass.

Lol

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
I think there is a lot of truth to that. Kyle has a way that he wants his offense to run, and he's tried to mold Jimmy (and every QB he's ever coached) to it. Hence the strained relationship this season because Jimmy has had enough of it, and wants to sling it more (he stated as such). It's clear they're butting heads, and I think that is EXACTLY why we're seeing better play from Jimmy this season. Kyle is loosening the reigns a bit, and Jimmy is also limiting bone head plays. They each had to give in a little bit in order to get more of what they want. This give and take between QB and head coach/play caller is crucial to a team's success, and you can't have one dominating the other too much.

Theres zero truth to it on my end. Kyle is doing what is best for this team, which is Jimmy throwing less. Jimmy might not like it but Kyle is protecting Jimmy from himself. It's what Ken Dorsey needs to do to Josh Allen right now and he IS an elite guy.

Jimmy was at his best in 2019. He's not gonna be better having more responsibility IMO. Just get the ball to the playmakers within the offense.

#1 passing DVOA. Offense doesn't need to change so Jimmy has more responsibility. Jimmy just needs to be a tad more aggressive when the plays are there and eliminate the bonehead decisions. He's doing the latter the last two games which is a positive. Now work on the former.

"Jimmy's not getting better."

"#1 passing DVOA"

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Yes "one game." But I'm sure you wouldn't make the argument that "Kyle sucked" last game and Jimmy "carried him." Did Jimmy bail Kyle out multiple times on 3rd and long? Absolutely. But Kyle deserves credit for setting up some of those chunk plays, even if it meant running into a stacked box over and over again. And also designing some of those chunk plays. It wasn't ALL Jimmy, which again, I haven't heard you say.

I think the word "carry" is being used way too f**king much in this thread and on this forum. We're talking about the most complex sport in the world, 11 v 11, multiple moving parts every single play. No player nor coach is carrying everyone nor getting carried by everyone. That whole argument is as simpleton as it gets. Leave that for 49ATT.

That's the exact argument he has made. His whole shtick is Kyle is limiting Jimmy by not giving him an offense that "fits" him. So yah Jimmy is carrying Kyles bad offense. The offense that is #1 in passing DVOA even with a guy you even admit isn't elite.

I think there is a lot of truth to that. Kyle has a way that he wants his offense to run, and he's tried to mold Jimmy (and every QB he's ever coached) to it. Hence the strained relationship this season because Jimmy has had enough of it, and wants to sling it more (he stated as such). It's clear they're butting heads, and I think that is EXACTLY why we're seeing better play from Jimmy this season. Kyle is loosening the reigns a bit, and Jimmy is also limiting bone head plays. They each had to give in a little bit in order to get more of what they want. This give and take between QB and head coach/play caller is crucial to a team's success, and you can't have one dominating the other too much.

I wonder when Trey is gonna tell Kyle to step off as he's not going to be a FB anymore.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 9ers4eva:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Yes "one game." But I'm sure you wouldn't make the argument that "Kyle sucked" last game and Jimmy "carried him." Did Jimmy bail Kyle out multiple times on 3rd and long? Absolutely. But Kyle deserves credit for setting up some of those chunk plays, even if it meant running into a stacked box over and over again. And also designing some of those chunk plays. It wasn't ALL Jimmy, which again, I haven't heard you say.

I think the word "carry" is being used way too f**king much in this thread and on this forum. We're talking about the most complex sport in the world, 11 v 11, multiple moving parts every single play. No player nor coach is carrying everyone nor getting carried by everyone. That whole argument is as simpleton as it gets. Leave that for 49ATT.

That's the exact argument he has made. His whole shtick is Kyle is limiting Jimmy by not giving him an offense that "fits" him. So yah Jimmy is carrying Kyles bad offense. The offense that is #1 in passing DVOA even with a guy you even admit isn't elite.

I think there is a lot of truth to that. Kyle has a way that he wants his offense to run, and he's tried to mold Jimmy (and every QB he's ever coached) to it. Hence the strained relationship this season because Jimmy has had enough of it, and wants to sling it more (he stated as such). It's clear they're butting heads, and I think that is EXACTLY why we're seeing better play from Jimmy this season. Kyle is loosening the reigns a bit, and Jimmy is also limiting bone head plays. They each had to give in a little bit in order to get more of what they want. This give and take between QB and head coach/play caller is crucial to a team's success, and you can't have one dominating the other too much.

I wonder when Trey is gonna tell Kyle to step off as he's not going to be a FB anymore.

That needs to happen as well.

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by VinculumJuris:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
Perhaps the issue is there are posters who will never admit to it when Jimmy has a poor performance. They always try to change the subject to how good looking the guy is instead of facing the ugly truth. I don't care how good looking someone is, they are not exempt from criticism for piss poor play.

With that said, Jimmy is having a career season imo. His TD% is good and his INT% is low. He is completing a decent amount of passes outside of his comfort zone and he is forcing less passes into tight coverage. I actually cannot ask much more from him. I hope he keeps it up.

But we do it admit when Jimmy has a poor performance, but people like you who expect us to admit it don't seem to remember when we do. Then you guys keep saying this.

And yes he's having a good year, I still think he's a top 12-15 QB in this league. Yes, he's not elite, but like I've always said, you don't need a elite QB to win a Super Bowl.

People like me? 🤣 What people am I?

I said you, because "You" are the one posting it.

Oh, I thought you were going to call me a Jimmy hater. My praises and criticism goes up and down as Jimmy's performances go up and down.

The post I made was directed at a select few who always bring up Jimmy's looks in defense of his poor performances as if it makes up for them. Are you one of those poster's? Just asking since it seems I struck a nerve.

I admittedly read less than 50% of the posts in this thread, but I don't remember seeing what you're describing... Is there a recent example or does this go back a ways?

Yes. Furlow posted this yesterday.

"Poor Jimmy. So handsome, yet so hated."

I have never seen anyone post personal hateful things about Jimmy. I have only seen folks criticize his poor performances and question his leadership off the field. To make it seem like fans on this forum hate Jimmy as a person is disingenuous and needs to stop.

I did not post that. Nor have I sent anyone use his looks as an excuse for poor play. Even Jimmy's strongest defenders admit when he plays poorly or mades bad throws (like the one against KC). There is NO counterexample to the handful of extreme Jimmy haters that say he sucks, is carried, etc. NO ONE is saying the opposite and that he's elite, carries the team, is the only reason we're winning, etc. The extremism comes from one side only.

Sorry. It was random who posted it.

Random who is a Jimmy hater, so obviously he was being sarcastic. Again, I've never seen anyone use his looks as an excuse for poor play. That's a reach.

I gues we all just see what we want. So is random a Jimmy hater or is he a Jimmy critic?

Does it matter? He didn't post that to defend Garoppolo.

Criticism and defending are opposite terms. I've come very close to defending him recently,...@ least questioning the playcalling early in games and the way we seem to want to milk the clock instead of attempt to build leads.

Is that enough for you? Or do I have to lay my life on the line for the guy?? Sheesh.

Some of you are far too sensitive. No one "hates" Jimmy. What some of us do hate is extreme exaggeration and trying to be silenced for calling the color blue, "blue."

The previous poster had it right. I'm a critic. Furlow and others parade a term like "hate" and namecall people as "haters" over and over because they don't wish to discuss the team or posts about the team, but would rather enjoy off-topic infighting about each other. I'll criticize posters as well but in the frame of what they are saying or in a few cases here, "promoting:,....as if they've been hired or are relatives of said players or coaches.

e.g.,...what does being a Jimmy hater or a lover have to do with his 3rd down % or his current air yard stats compared to other QBs around the league?

How does this lover/hater thing go, anyway? If I love him, I will ignore the bad stats and if I hate him, I will bring them up for discussion on a messageboard? Does this even halfway make sense to sensible people that come to a discussion forum?

It's an inciteful term that people will quickly deny,....so that is why they will continue saying it, regardless of how some of us reply to it. Doesn't bother me so I let them have their fun.

Originally posted by Furlow:
Random had hundreds of posts trying to convince us that it was Jimmy's fault for Kittles's drop against Green Bay.

Why bring up old stuff with no link? I have no clue what you're talking about. This is the Jimmy thread so it's very easy for a learned man like yourself to simply quote me on it since you want to rediscuss it.

If you are going to complain about stuff that's a year old, how bout we do it in context and hash it out, since that is your interest? Or is your only true interest to incite with no evidence and continue the train?

I'm all about evidence/links/information to back up a point someone is making. Can you do the same? Ever?

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Random had hundreds of posts trying to convince us that it was Jimmy's fault for Kittles's drop against Green Bay.

Why bring up old stuff with no link? I have no clue what you're talking about. This is the Jimmy thread so it's very easy for a learned man like yourself to simply quote me on it since you want to rediscuss it.

If you are going to complain about stuff that's a year old, how bout we do it in context and hash it out, since that is your interest? Or is your only true interest to incite with no evidence and continue the train?

I'm all about evidence/links/information to back up a point someone is making. Can you do the same? Ever?

Proof? Dude, this thread has almost 136k posts and over 9k pages, no search function. Asking someone to dig that up is.....who has time for that?

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Random had hundreds of posts trying to convince us that it was Jimmy's fault for Kittles's drop against Green Bay.

Why bring up old stuff with no link? I have no clue what you're talking about. This is the Jimmy thread so it's very easy for a learned man like yourself to simply quote me on it since you want to rediscuss it.

If you are going to complain about stuff that's a year old, how bout we do it in context and hash it out, since that is your interest? Or is your only true interest to incite with no evidence and continue the train?

I'm all about evidence/links/information to back up a point someone is making. Can you do the same? Ever?

Proof? Dude, this thread has almost 136k posts and over 9k pages, no search function. Asking someone to dig that up is.....who has time for that?

Ever heard of Google? It takes 10 seconds. If you have time to paraphrase what someone said, provide a reference so we can truly discuss the context. Or just leave it alone and run to the next misquote.

Wait,...I thought you were almost in the journalism field given your content????!! Hell,...isin't the field that you're venturing into what it's based on? Evidence?

Complete nonsense for you to defend people quoting old topics with no reference. But They're on a "certain side",...so here you are, attaching yourself to nonsense.

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Originally posted by random49er:

Originally posted by Furlow:
Random had hundreds of posts trying to convince us that it was Jimmy's fault for Kittles's drop against Green Bay.

Why bring up old stuff with no link? I have no clue what you're talking about. This is the Jimmy thread so it's very easy for a learned man like yourself to simply quote me on it since you want to rediscuss it.

If you are going to complain about stuff that's a year old, how bout we do it in context and hash it out, since that is your interest? Or is your only true interest to incite with no evidence and continue the train?

I'm all about evidence/links/information to back up a point someone is making. Can you do the same? Ever?

Proof? Dude, this thread has almost 136k posts and over 9k pages, no search function. Asking someone to dig that up is.....who has time for that?

Ever heard of Google? It takes 10 seconds. If you have time to paraphrase what someone said, provide a reference so we can truly discuss the context. Or just leave it alone and run to the next misquote.

Wait,...I thought you were almost in the journalism field given your content????!! Hell,...isin't the field that you're venturing into what it's based on? Evidence?

Complete nonsense for you to defend people quoting old topics with no reference. But They're on a "certain side",...so here you are, attaching yourself to nonsense.

are you really comparing watching game film to talking about something that happened in the Jimmy thread? Well, you've said the game film isn't necessary that watching things live was good enough sooooooo.

Oh, and for the link:
"Breaking down film is not necessary to come to these conclusions. This is why the film topic should be put in context. Film review can be critical...depending on the question at hand. In this game...he stunk and you could see it on the live broadcast."

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/189603-qb-jimmy-garoppolo-thread/page8873/

The term hater is used to incite those who criticize Jimmy. Exactly what random stated and the exact point I was trying to make. The terms used should be critic and defender. You are a Jimmy critic or a Jimmy defender. If those two terms were used, there would be a lot less bs and a lot more solid discussion in this thread.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Proof? Dude, this thread has almost 136k posts and over 9k pages, no search function. Asking someone to dig that up is.....who has time for that?

For the record, everytime I have brought up the search function in various places (ask a mod, here, etc.) a mod/admin says the search function works just fine.

This board has the worst search in any message board I have ever been a part of. It's completely useless. I agree with you.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Oh, and for the link:
"Breaking down film is not necessary to come to these conclusions. This is why the film topic should be put in context. Film review can be critical...depending on the question at hand. In this game...he stunk and you could see it on the live broadcast."

https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/189603-qb-jimmy-garoppolo-thread/page8873/

Yes,...that's my opinion. I was disappointed in the lack of production and harsh because the stats would look better than what really happened. I was upset @ the game,....but I did admit things like no up-for-grab balls this game (progress?),....and thl/NY85 brought some positive numbers back for Jimmy and I said "I'll take it."

Did you happen to read those too?? It's like you completely miss them. Why is that?

What's this gotta do with the Kittle b.s. stuff Furlow wants to now argue about?

And while I have your attention,...I notice that your latest video has alot of stark contrasts with what NC has been campaigning here for over a day now regarding the bad job Kyle has been doing.

You've surely had to see the posts, right? What's your opinion on them in relation to what NC is saying?

There. Let's discuss the team. Let's not skip over the b.s. certain posters you like repeat over and over and only call out the posters you don't particularly favor.

I complimented you on your last video this morning. Good stuff. Did you notice that?