What is our best QB option for 2021?

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Excellent post.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

Pal, you're full of crap. You act as though your opinion is factual. It's not.

Yes Jimmy has only 35 starts. That's one of the problems. He has to stay healthy or he will never get any better. Personally, I think he's as good as he will ever be. The injuries certainly won't help his already poor mobility and they may also hurt his confidence. Not so much in his ability but confidence in his health. If he's concerned about hurting that twice injured ankle or anything else, it could affect his play.

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

(1) How long have you been coaching QB's?
(2) Again, you insert an opinion as though it's an indisputable fact., It's not.
(3)Your opinion, again. Nothing to back up your opinions , but more opinions.
(4) Again, more bullcrap masquerading as facts. This one is way way off.

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

Pal, you're full of crap. You act as though your opinion is factual. It's not.

Care to provide evidence to your claim? I can do so for most of the claims I made, and as for the top 15 QBs, statistics are fairly clear if you don't want to spend time looking at video evidence. For example, the video evidence that shows how Garoppolo's mechanical flaws affect his deep ball accuracy, which he even demonstrated in 2017, as the video below shows at about 8:35 in:



So far I've provided statistical evidence that those other QBs are better and I've provided video evidence clearly showing Garoppolo's most crucial mechanical flaw. Are you going to provide any evidence that I'm just spouting opinion, or are you just going to spout opinion?

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

(1) How long have you been coaching QB's?
(2) Again, you insert an opinion as though it's an indisputable fact., It's not.
(3)Your opinion, again. Nothing to back up your opinions , but more opinions.
(4) Again, more bullcrap masquerading as facts. This one is way way off.

(1) Argument from authority. Fairly irrelevant. Either the facts agree with me or they don't. Since you like authority, look at the video I just posted about about 8:30 in and refute it. Tell us all why he is wrong.



(2) The claim I was disputing was that he's "better than average AND IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING." The implication was that it was OBVIOUS that Jimmy is better than average. My post prior to that lists some evidence that suggests it is FAR from obvious that Jimmy is better than average, and in fact that evidence suggests he is clearly NOT. Care to refute the statistical evidence of those 15 QB I listed as better? Pretty much all of them have better statistics, and pretty much all of them have better arms and have had more success. So by all means, use that evidence to refute my claim that it is NOT obvious that Jimmy is better than average.

(3) There's evidence, including statistics and video, which suggest he's CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, not better than about 15 other starting QBs. By all means, refute the statistics and video. Show me why Jimmy's 3.6 interception percentage is actually better than Matthew Stafford's 1.8. By all means.

(4) There are numerous evidenced base reasons to suggest that Jimmy is prone to stupid turnovers, and watching the games shows that he makes many of the same mistakes. Those aren't opinions, they're observable reality. Same with his mechanical flaws, as pointed out in about 8:30 in the video I posted (through the end of the video). Explain why it is wrong.

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

(1) How long have you been coaching QB's?
(2) Again, you insert an opinion as though it's an indisputable fact., It's not.
(3)Your opinion, again. Nothing to back up your opinions , but more opinions.
(4) Again, more bullcrap masquerading as facts. This one is way way off.

Agreed, especially the bold.

If we can somehow trade for Stafford I'd take him over Jimmy. Other than that I don't see a clear upgrade and I don't want a rookie starting. The way I see it it's either Stafford or Jimmy starting for us next season

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by eastie:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by LottDMontanaO:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
The number 2 rushing attack and number 2 defense took us to the Super Bowl. Jimmy was carried by that team except for about 7 quarters in which he carried the team. The only reason he's starter quality is because there aren't 32 starters in the NFL.

Joke of a post. And you lose all credibility with your last sentence.

Give me Garoppolo again leading this team at QB next year plus the talent on both sides of the ball and I'll take this team in any game vs. any team next year.

The only lack of credibility is the credibility of your ability to ascertain quarterback quality.

These QBs are all better than Jimmy.

Mahomes
Wilson
Rodgers
Brady
Allen
Jackson
Mayfield
Stafford
Watson
Rivers (4005 yards, 23 TD, 10 INT, 1.9 INT%, 98.0 passer rating, that's right, better)
Carr (25 TDs, 7 INTs, 3732 yards, two 4000 seasons, 102.2 rating, that's right, better)
Herbert (Yep, a rookie is better and it's not close - 28 TDs, 10 INTs, 4034 yards)
Brees
Rapelessberger
Tannehill (that's right, better. 32 TDs, 7 INTs, 106.7 rating, after leading the NFL in rating last year).

So, that's 15 starters better than Jimmy, and that's not even including guys who it could be argued are better, or at least about the same or a little bit worse (Goff, Cousins, Foles), and it's not including guys who obviously are going to be better in a year or two (Joe Burrow).

The argument could be made that Garoppolo is the 18th best starting QB, and no reasonable person not blinded by homerism would rank above 13 or 14 -- at best. He has consistent mechanical flaws that affect the accuracy of his deep pass, he tends to stick with his pre-snap read too often, he lacks field vision, resulting in numerous interceptions due to failing to see a lurking zone defender (especially on coverages like cover 3 cloud, where he mistakes a corner playing a curl-flat as the deep third being open, and then a safety comes over and snatches the ball)

You're apparently happy with mediocre, because that's what Garoppolo is at best.

EDIT - oh yeah, that last sentence about 32 starters is something Shanahan himself has argued, if you mean to imply that the idea itself is a joke (but as a Jimmy homer, perhaps you only mean that he's one of the real starters. Maybe so, but if he is he's one of the worst ones in terms of those of the 32 who in a vacuum actually deserve to be starting).

Keep talking. Your posts about Garoppolo expose some things. I've watched and re-watched multiple times every single game he's started with the Niners. Have you? I've also watched his games at NE. When healthy, he's definitely in the Top 12 or so of NFL starting QBs. He's without question better than just an "average NFL QB" as you say - that goes without saying.

He still only has 35 total NFL starts, not a huge body of work and I firmly believe he can and will continue to improve. And, in every one of those starts where he didn't have to leave due to injury, or 30 games, he's helped keep his team in every single game in giving them a chance to win (not a single blowout - in the NFL where anything can happen on any given gameday, that's something I don't take lightly in wanting the Niners to win games). Yes, he's had some injuries but he also started 19 straight games in 2019 without coming out of a single game due to injury.

Regarding the QB position itself, I probably have as high of standards for this team as any fan - I've watched each of Montana's and Young's games and vividly remember their play going back to the '70s when Montana was first starting out. Was too young to remember watching Brodie much. So, my expectations for a Niners' QB are incredibly high. Garoppolo is of course not anywhere near Montana and Young, yet I firmly believe Garoppolo will continue to get better as he goes, especially under Shanahan. Garoppolo, in doing what he does in running this offense, helps this team get what's most important - wins.

With you apparently being serious with your posts on Garoppolo, we're done here. Not worth the time and agree to 100% disagree.

(1) Re: Watching him over and over: Yes, I have. That's why I picked up upon how his mechanical flaws affect his deep accuracy, and how I picked up on the fact that he doesn't consistently leave his first read when the coverage dictates he should, and it's how I picked up on his tendency to fail to see lurking defenders in zone coverage, and in particular cover 3 cloud and similar looks.

(2) Re: "Better than average and it goes without saying.": No, it doesn't. Statistically he is average. Physically he's average. Mechanically he's below average. Mobility he's below average. His release is well above average. As a sum, it agrees with the eye test, that he's about average.

(3) Re: He has a limited number of starts and should get better: This is not relevant to how good he is NOW. Moreover, he's gotten WORSE since he arrived here. Potential is like a fart in the wind.

(4) Re: Comparing him to legendary 49ers QBs: You're right, he's not on their level. But I think the problem here is that you've spent so much time watching 49ers QBs that you haven't watched other QBs in the NFL. If you had, maybe you'd see that about 15 of them are definitely better than Jimmy. You talk about how Jimmy will get better under Shanahan, but what about a QB who's CURRENTLY already better than Jimmy, like Stafford? You don't think Stafford would get better under Shanahan? You don't think that absolutely elite arm, that better mobility, and that 7th all time in 4th quarter comebacks that Stafford has wouldn't improve under Shanahan?

Regarding running this offense and helping his team win, Jimmy is not a great game manager. He throws really dumb, inopportune interceptions, and it's so frequent that it's a trend, not a hiccup. Matthew Stafford throws fewer interceptions, has a better arm, and engineers more 4th quarter come backs (again, tied with John Elway for 7th best all time in that category).

Yes, I'm serious with my posts on Garoppolo. He's better than what's on this team, but what's on this team is horrid. Without one second's hesitation I'd trade Garoppolo for Stafford if it were possible, despite him being three years older. I would RUN to the phone for that trade. Garoppolo is a decent, average, NFL quarterback who would start on seven or eight teams due to the scarcity of competent quarterbacks. But there are much better ones, including one that might possibly be available via trade (Stafford) and one or two that might be an upgrade in the draft.

I see you said you're done discussing it with me. Very well. But I would suggest looking more closely and what causes the misses and interceptions he tends to have, and maybe you'll see what I see, that there are consistent, systematic issues that hinder his effectiveness, and I would guess even you would admit his arm is not going to make you gasp in wonder like someone like Stafford can do.

Also, you responded to me and called my post a joke, so that is why I took the time to break it down in detail. If you don't like people doing this, don't call them a joke with no credibility.

(1) How long have you been coaching QB's?
(2) Again, you insert an opinion as though it's an indisputable fact., It's not.
(3)Your opinion, again. Nothing to back up your opinions , but more opinions.
(4) Again, more bullcrap masquerading as facts. This one is way way off.

Agreed, especially the bold.

So refute it. Refute the things I said. Prove they're just bullcrap masquerading as facts. Here, I'll break down what I said in point 4.

(1) Refute that if Shanahan can make Jimmy better, he can make Stafford better.
(2) Refute Jimmy makes stupid interceptions (well documented and reflected in his high interception rate).
(3) Refute that Stafford is number 7 all time on the 4th quarter comeback list.
(4) Refute that Jimmy has easily observable mechanical flaws (as shown in the video I've posted several times).

The only thing in that point that is disputable is that Jimmy would start on 7 or 8 teams. It may be he'd start on half. But if that's false, then Jimmy would have to unseat several of those I listed, which is unlikely, given that there's no real evidence that he's better than the likes of Cousins. But by all means, provide evidence that I'm wrong. It's not like I haven't provided evidence to back up my assertions, despite all of you making that claim.

Of your 15 QB's , 6 have led their team to the superbowl. The others haven't been able to get there. JG led the Niners there LAST YEAR. You're NOT a QB coach, yet you seem to think you are as capable of evaluating the play at the position as the guys WHO GET PAID to do the job. Hahaha. You also very conveniently ignore everything that JG does so very well. As for your claim that he's 'just average'' I have a thought. Remember that game last year when the team traveled to NO for a game that was critical in deciding home field advantage in the playoffs? Remember that barely friggn' average QB led the team to a hard fought late game winning TD in that hostile environment? An average QB doesn't win that game, bud. I've been going to Niner games since YA Tittle was the starting QB. I've watched a lot of football and played ball in school until I got hurt. JG is a very good QB. 2/3 of the guys you mention haven't done squat compared to the limited run Jimmy has had. He's a winner. period.

Golden dropping truth bombs

Maybe if we trade Jimmy back to NE, Kirk will come here?