Los Angeles Chargers QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by BleedsRedNGold:

Originally posted by dhp318:
Glad you've finally come to this conclusion too

Why? Two of the 5 first round picks by this regime were complete busts. Nothing's guaranteed. This team is locked and loaded and ready to compete for 6. No one has the patience to deal with a Zack Wilson-type game every now and then. These guys won't be good until next season. There's no definitive evidence that playing a rookie season makes you a better QB than sitting for a year and learning while getting some spot duty.

Correct. Just like there is no definitive evidence that sitting your rookie season makes you a better QB than playing a rookie season.

how about the coaches philosophy on holding back a rookie as evidence ?

Thats not evidence.

Sure it is.. we have to wait until his rookie season is over to find out, but Kyle sees it as beneficial to Lance

+ Show all quotes
No it isnt. It's one coaching staff's plan/opinion. That would be like saying Jim Mora started Peyton Manning as a rookie, so his philosophy of not holding back a rookie is evidence.

Again, there is zero evidence of either side of the debate because the opposite would have to not be true. And since (regardless of side), the other side doesnt get a chance to materialize, you cant say that the opposite wouldnt have turned out the same way.

Jim Mora.. not a great example of a great offensive coach

Kyle chose to hold him back.. thats all you need to know on how he feels on whats the best way. same with Andy Reid

Another post missing the point.

what is your point then.. nothing ?

just to argue a blanket statement saying there's no evidence ?

if you can't see that Kyle chose one of those sides to this thing then you are just not posting on what the subject is

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I mean yes it does lol? Josh Allen, Wilson, Watson, Jackson, Herbert, Murray etc were all considered "raw" in some sort of fashion. Mahomes said he couldn't read defenses when he won the MVP.

With Justin Fields starting Sunday, 29 of 33 QBs taken in the first round in the last 10 draft cycles (2012-21) will have started inside their first 10 games as a pro. And if Trey Lance starts anytime soon, it'll be 30 of 33.

Redshirting a first-round QB rarely actually happens. pic.twitter.com/SeGUCyAX30

— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) September 22, 2021

Great 49ers gift ideas ⇨

Nice observation, but there are a lot of busts on that list. A good amount of success stories too. So this ends up being just a nice piece of trivia.

Originally posted by ritz126:
thats my point i did my film analysis on Trey

he was my #1 choice out of the 3 i know you perfered Fields ( i personally was Trey>Jones>Fields)

its very obvious how much improvement he made from his college tape but if you watch him in preseason he still isnt ready . You think the only way you develop is by playing live games and i think thats stupid

I never said that's the "only" way…why is everything in absolutes in here? I said the way he will develop the most is by actually playing football.

Originally posted by BleedsRedNGold:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I mean yes it does lol? Josh Allen, Wilson, Watson, Jackson, Herbert, Murray etc were all considered "raw" in some sort of fashion. Mahomes said he couldn't read defenses when he won the MVP.

With Justin Fields starting Sunday, 29 of 33 QBs taken in the first round in the last 10 draft cycles (2012-21) will have started inside their first 10 games as a pro. And if Trey Lance starts anytime soon, it'll be 30 of 33.

Redshirting a first-round QB rarely actually happens. pic.twitter.com/SeGUCyAX30

— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) September 22, 2021

Nice observation, but there are a lot of busts on that list. A good amount of success stories too. So this ends up being just a nice piece of trivia.

There's a lot of bust on every position in the 1st rd…that's just football. The fact is 1st rd QBs play football at some point in the 1st yr

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by ritz126:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Player development improves the most by playing…this team accepted the idea that a loss or two might happen if he plays….that's part of the process and fans need to be okay with it

oh that explains all the physically talented raw players who started early dominating now

I mean yes it does lol? Josh Allen, Wilson, Watson, Jackson, Herbert, Murray etc were all considered "raw" in some sort of fashion. Mahomes said he couldn't read defenses when he won the MVP.

With Justin Fields starting Sunday, 29 of 33 QBs taken in the first round in the last 10 draft cycles (2012-21) will have started inside their first 10 games as a pro. And if Trey Lance starts anytime soon, it'll be 30 of 33.

Redshirting a first-round QB rarely actually happens. pic.twitter.com/SeGUCyAX30

— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) September 22, 2021

And how many of those 33 had a starter anywhere close to being equal with jimmy G in front of them?
Mahomes started because the Chiefs were resting starters
Phillip Rivers didn't start until his 33rd game after Brees got hurt(probably the closest example considering this was before Brees was really Brees)

Originally posted by a49erfan77:
70% of the Pats passing offense right now is screens or short/underneath 1st reads. I wouldn't say Mac is running a legit 'pro' offense.

Jimmy and Mac

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by BleedsRedNGold:

Originally posted by NYniner85:
I mean yes it does lol? Josh Allen, Wilson, Watson, Jackson, Herbert, Murray etc were all considered "raw" in some sort of fashion. Mahomes said he couldn't read defenses when he won the MVP.

With Justin Fields starting Sunday, 29 of 33 QBs taken in the first round in the last 10 draft cycles (2012-21) will have started inside their first 10 games as a pro. And if Trey Lance starts anytime soon, it'll be 30 of 33.

Redshirting a first-round QB rarely actually happens. pic.twitter.com/SeGUCyAX30

— Albert Breer (@AlbertBreer) September 22, 2021

Nice observation, but there are a lot of busts on that list. A good amount of success stories too. So this ends up being just a nice piece of trivia.

There's a lot of bust on every position in the 1st rd…that's just football. The fact is 1st rd QBs play football at some point in the 1st yr

that doesn't fit the argument of starting them the first game. not that many QBs did. if your argument is truly just playing time in their rookie season.. they you are debating nothing as trey already played

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by BleedsRedNGold:

Originally posted by dhp318:
Glad you've finally come to this conclusion too

Why? Two of the 5 first round picks by this regime were complete busts. Nothing's guaranteed. This team is locked and loaded and ready to compete for 6. No one has the patience to deal with a Zack Wilson-type game every now and then. These guys won't be good until next season. There's no definitive evidence that playing a rookie season makes you a better QB than sitting for a year and learning while getting some spot duty.

Correct. Just like there is no definitive evidence that sitting your rookie season makes you a better QB than playing a rookie season.

how about the coaches philosophy on holding back a rookie as evidence ?

Thats not evidence.

Sure it is.. we have to wait until his rookie season is over to find out, but Kyle sees it as beneficial to Lance

No it isnt. It's one coaching staff's plan/opinion. That would be like saying Jim Mora started Peyton Manning as a rookie, so his philosophy of not holding back a rookie is evidence.

Again, there is zero evidence of either side of the debate because the opposite would have to not be true. And since (regardless of side), the other side doesnt get a chance to materialize, you cant say that the opposite wouldnt have turned out the same way.

+ Show all quotes Jim Mora.. not a great example of a great offensive coach

Kyle chose to hold him back.. thats all you need to know on how he feels on whats the best way. same with Andy Reid

Another post missing the point.

what is your point then.. nothing ?

just to argue a blanket statement saying there's no evidence ?

if you can't see that Kyle chose one of those sides to this thing then you are just not posting on what the subject is

Here you go......

-Its impossible to prove a QB who sat as a rookie that turned out great only turned out great because he sat (because there is no way to prove he wouldnt have been great if he started as a rookie).

-It is impossible to prove a QB who started as a rookie and turned out terrible only turned out terrible because he played (because there is no way to prove he wouldnt have been terrible if he sat as a rookie).

My point is, there is zero evidence to prove whatever side of the argument you are on, because the opposite never happened so you cant make any conclusions about it. Would Patrick Mahomes be what he is today if he started as a rookie? Maybe, maybe not. No one can prove it either way.

That's my point. Has nothing to do with Trey starting or not.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
And how many of those 33 had a starter anywhere close to being equal with jimmy G in front of them?
Mahomes started because the Chiefs were resting starters
Phillip Rivers didn't start until his 33rd game after Brees got hurt(probably the closest example considering this was before Brees was really Brees)

Jones had Eli, jackson had Flacco, a couple had Taylor, those are some off the top of my head…if those teams wanted better bridge QBs they could have paid for one all the same. No team is "forced" to start a rookie, most realize playing is one of the main ways to develop.

Originally posted by boast:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by ritz126:
Peyton manning was a complete prospect that lacked nfl reps

this isnt the case with Lance he doesn't just need nfl reps he needs to work on his fundamentals

Josh Allen's fundamentals were worse then Lance's and he started, learned, and now is one of the highest paid QBs in the league.

Josh Allen went 5-6 in starts his rookie year. Kyle's not about to risk it if it doesnt have to.

Bills had a horrible roster with a second yr HC. Those snaps were valuable for his growth…that team wasn't winning s**t with Taylor either.

There really isn't any hard evidence to support whether a qb is better developed by sitting his rookie year or starting his rookie year. All I know is unless Jimmy completely lays a stinker of a game or gets injured, Trey will not be starting this year.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by BleedsRedNGold:

Originally posted by dhp318:
Glad you've finally come to this conclusion too

Why? Two of the 5 first round picks by this regime were complete busts. Nothing's guaranteed. This team is locked and loaded and ready to compete for 6. No one has the patience to deal with a Zack Wilson-type game every now and then. These guys won't be good until next season. There's no definitive evidence that playing a rookie season makes you a better QB than sitting for a year and learning while getting some spot duty.

Correct. Just like there is no definitive evidence that sitting your rookie season makes you a better QB than playing a rookie season.

how about the coaches philosophy on holding back a rookie as evidence ?

Thats not evidence.

Sure it is.. we have to wait until his rookie season is over to find out, but Kyle sees it as beneficial to Lance

No it isnt. It's one coaching staff's plan/opinion. That would be like saying Jim Mora started Peyton Manning as a rookie, so his philosophy of not holding back a rookie is evidence.

Again, there is zero evidence of either side of the debate because the opposite would have to not be true. And since (regardless of side), the other side doesnt get a chance to materialize, you cant say that the opposite wouldnt have turned out the same way.

Jim Mora.. not a great example of a great offensive coach

Kyle chose to hold him back.. thats all you need to know on how he feels on whats the best way. same with Andy Reid

+ Show all quotes
Another post missing the point.

what is your point then.. nothing ?

just to argue a blanket statement saying there's no evidence ?

if you can't see that Kyle chose one of those sides to this thing then you are just not posting on what the subject is

Here you go......

-Its impossible to prove a QB who sat as a rookie that turned out great only turned out great because he sat (because there is no way to prove he wouldnt have been great if he started as a rookie).

-It is impossible to prove a QB who started as a rookie and turned out terrible only turned out terrible because he played (because there is no way to prove he wouldnt have been terrible if he sat as a rookie).

My point is, there is zero evidence to prove whatever side of the argument you are on, because the opposite never happened so you cant make any conclusions about it. Would Patrick Mahomes be what he is today if he started as a rookie? Maybe, maybe not. No one can prove it either way.

That's my point. Has nothing to do with Trey starting or not.

you seem to counter this argument more with sitting him, then with the guys who say play him now.. why is that ?

and Why would a coach feel having a QB sit as much as they could be worth it, if there is no evidence ?

Originally posted by YACBros85:
There really isn't any hard evidence to support whether a qb is better developed by sitting his rookie year or starting his rookie year. All I know is unless Jimmy completely lays a stinker of a game or gets injured, Trey will not be starting this year.

First sentence is correct based on evidence. The second sentence is an opinion.

Originally posted by NinerBuff:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
There really isn't any hard evidence to support whether a qb is better developed by sitting his rookie year or starting his rookie year. All I know is unless Jimmy completely lays a stinker of a game or gets injured, Trey will not be starting this year.

First sentence is correct based on evidence. The second sentence is an opinion.

still holding out hope i see

Originally posted by NinerBuff:

Originally posted by YACBros85:
There really isn't any hard evidence to support whether a qb is better developed by sitting his rookie year or starting his rookie year. All I know is unless Jimmy completely lays a stinker of a game or gets injured, Trey will not be starting this year.

First sentence is correct based on evidence. The second sentence is an opinion.

In regards to my second statement, what evidence have you seen that would convince you otherwise?