Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

My goodness. Probably best to make the playoffs first.

True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Nah. our offense won't look radically different with Trey. If we rebuild our playbook to add dozens of RPO options for Trey then Shanny is a fool and deserves to be fired. We did not draft trey lance to be a human punching bag. Our Play book will not change that much but our offense will change in the distribution of route trees that are called. Shanny will start opening up the field with treys arm strength using timing/outs/deep outs. maybe hell design a naked qb boot or two. But I don't see the QB as a run option 7x per game. No way. Trey's not fast enough to be a premier rpo threat (in the pros). And he is way short at protecting himself. Better to develop him as a pocket passer reading the field than turn him into a fullback with an arm.

What did we see in his first start?

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by 49erBigMac:

Originally posted by genus49:
Garoppolo is not going to be here next season. Even if we manage to win the SB with him.

They're trying to drive up his trade value. Simple as that.

I disagree there, if we win the 6th there's no way Jimmy is traded. We'd push everything a year down the line. Sign Moseley and maybe DJ to future loaded deals, let the rest walk and wait and see if we repeat.

It's ok to disagree but you saw the team trade Buckner after 2019. A guy who is one of the best at his position in the prime of his career with no injury history.

why? Because the team realized their best way to keep a good team together is by moving him and using the money and draft picks to add to the roster.

There are a ton of free agents on this team and many around the league signed 1 year deals which means free agency this year will be pretty epic. Keeping Lance on the bench for so long is not a smart move for his growth or the best way to field a strong team.

It's not just Jimmy's play at stake here. It's his contract. Shave off 27 million dollars and suddenly you can make some serious moves in free agency and extend your key players to build around the young QB…while also adding needed draft capital you lost by trading up for the young kid.

I get that Trey is young but eventually he needs to play. Keeping Jimmy for the money he's making next year is absolutely not going to happen. It makes no business sense.

I think we can sign Deebo and keep Jimmy without too much of a problem - and go into the offseason with some good cap space to sign good free agents to fill the holes in this team. However, signing *both* Deebo and Bosa without letting Jimmy go is going to be a challenge. If Deebo is 18 million, Bosa's numbers will be (I think) around 10+ million or maybe more.

I think AB said in 2022 we're only about 12 million under the cap.

That's the thing…we took Lance for a reason. We gave up so much for a reason. Even if we win the SB with Jimmy(big IF obviously) can we really say we won it because of him?

He's made some key throws in big moments for sure but he's pretty much game manager status right now. What's the upside to keeping him for one more year? Are we going to sign him to a new deal and trade Trey? Highly doubtful so what's the upside? Status quo?

Does Trey need to sit for 2 years? That will be almost 3 years with very little live action. That's 2 years off his rookie deal and a chance to really build a solid roster around the young QB we invested so much in.

IMO it's a no brainer. You lose the salary, get the draft pick(s) for the guy you're not going to extend anyways.

The other flip side is Trey. You want to see what he can do as much as possible so when you hopefully look to extend him to a new deal you're confident you have THE guy.

Kap got like a year and a half before his extension. Jimmy got his deal after 5 games.

Team has to be smart about this and I'm confident they will be.

I agree with pretty much everything you said, I just don't think you're taking into account that the QB that leads you to a Superbowl victory is practically untouchable. I'm not sure Kyle could sell it to his team.

They'll all be gunning for a repeat and then they have to go through the ups and downs of an inexperienced QB.

IMO it's the only scenario Jimmy stays next year.

I can't wait for the Trey era, but if Jimmy wants to deliver #6, I'll wait a little longer.

Originally posted by 9erson3:

Originally posted by billbird2111:
True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

2019 Jimmy would have been gone if Trey was here earlier. Jimmy will not be here. Bank it. That cap savings will go to a nice FA pick up or two. We have our franchise guy and he is currently on the sidelines.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

My goodness. Probably best to make the playoffs first.

True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

So if we don't trade Jimmy if we win the sb, how do we extend Deebo and Bosa? Do we let one of them walk? It seems more preposterous to let one of them walk then to trade Jimmy after a sb win. Especially after spending 3 first round draft picks on a QB.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

My goodness. Probably best to make the playoffs first.

True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

So if we don't trade Jimmy if we win the sb, how do we extend Deebo and Bosa? Do we let one of them walk? It seems more preposterous to let one of them walk then to trade Jimmy after a sb win. Especially after spending 3 first round draft picks on a QB.

R.E.S.T.R.U.C.T.U.R.E

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

My goodness. Probably best to make the playoffs first.

True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

So if we don't trade Jimmy if we win the sb, how do we extend Deebo and Bosa? Do we let one of them walk? It seems more preposterous to let one of them walk then to trade Jimmy after a sb win. Especially after spending 3 first round draft picks on a QB.

R.E.S.T.R.U.C.T.U.R.E

So you think Jimmy will take a paycut after winning a sb?

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

My goodness. Probably best to make the playoffs first.

True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

So if we don't trade Jimmy if we win the sb, how do we extend Deebo and Bosa? Do we let one of them walk? It seems more preposterous to let one of them walk then to trade Jimmy after a sb win. Especially after spending 3 first round draft picks on a QB.

R.E.S.T.R.U.C.T.U.R.E

So you think Jimmy will take a paycut after winning a sb?

First of all, we are not winning a super bowl this year guys. Our defense and special teams are too erratic. Sorry to put a damper on things.

BUT if Jimmy gets us out of the first round, maybe the second...?...

If Jimmy throws 1 pick every 3 games between now and playoffs?

1 fumble every five games...?....

Oh yea baby.

He back.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

Originally posted by NotAFinga42:

Originally posted by billbird2111:

You cannot invest that much in a kid then have him as the backup.

Yes, you can. Yes, the 49ers have done it before. The 1987 trade for Steve Young cost the 49ers a 2nd and a 4th round pick. That was considered a ransom back in that day.

What happened? Young rode the bench for three seasons. He was thrust into the starting role when Joe Montana got injured.

I don't care how many picks the 49ers gave up for Trey Lance. If Garoppolo wins a Super Bowl, he isn't going anywhere. Neither is Lance.

My goodness. Probably best to make the playoffs first.

True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.

So if we don't trade Jimmy if we win the sb, how do we extend Deebo and Bosa? Do we let one of them walk? It seems more preposterous to let one of them walk then to trade Jimmy after a sb win. Especially after spending 3 first round draft picks on a QB.

R.E.S.T.R.U.C.T.U.R.E

So you think Jimmy will take a paycut after winning a sb?

First of all, we are not winning a super bowl this year guys. Our defense and special teams are too erratic. Sorry to put a damper on things.

BUT if Jimmy gets us out of the first round, maybe the second...?...

If Jimmy throws 1 pick every 3 games between now and playoffs?

1 fumble every five games...?....

Oh yea baby.

He back.

Well obviously it was a hypothetical and the chances of winning the sb this year is slim to none.

Originally posted by TheWooLick:
What did we see in his first start?

Originally posted by 9erson3:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Nah. our offense won't look radically different with Trey. If we rebuild our playbook to add dozens of RPO options for Trey then Shanny is a fool and deserves to be fired. We did not draft trey lance to be a human punching bag. Our Play book will not change that much but our offense will change in the distribution of route trees that are called. Shanny will start opening up the field with treys arm strength using timing/outs/deep outs. maybe hell design a naked qb boot or two. But I don't see the QB as a run option 7x per game. No way. Trey's not fast enough to be a premier rpo threat (in the pros). And he is way short at protecting himself. Better to develop him as a pocket passer reading the field than turn him into a fullback with an arm.

I do see it totally different. Not to open up Trey dashing down the field play after play. That will be used to get us out of some 3rd down situations. I do still see the run attack in heavy play but now we will see many more down field throws.

We all know Kyle demands blocking in this era but George, in my opinion, the WRs, will not have to be used so much as blocking machines and chance injury. Don't think he will ever not run that style offense but if Trey can get it out and complete passes we won't be so dependent on blocking for a huge run game plan.

Trey should open up a whole new look. How can we call Kyle dumb for this when no one has seen it come to life? I can't wait for a new look offense.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by 9erson3:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Nah. our offense won't look radically different with Trey. If we rebuild our playbook to add dozens of RPO options for Trey then Shanny is a fool and deserves to be fired. We did not draft trey lance to be a human punching bag. Our Play book will not change that much but our offense will change in the distribution of route trees that are called. Shanny will start opening up the field with treys arm strength using timing/outs/deep outs. maybe hell design a naked qb boot or two. But I don't see the QB as a run option 7x per game. No way. Trey's not fast enough to be a premier rpo threat (in the pros). And he is way short at protecting himself. Better to develop him as a pocket passer reading the field than turn him into a fullback with an arm.

I do see it totally different. Not to open up Trey dashing down the field play after play. That will be used to get us out of some 3rd down situations. I do still see the run attack in heavy play but now we will see many more down field throws.

We all know Kyle demands blocking in this era but George, in my opinion, the WRs, will not have to be used so much as blocking machines and chance injury. Don't think he will ever not run that style offense but if Trey can get it out and complete passes we won't be so dependent on blocking for a huge run game plan.

Trey should open up a whole new look. How can we call Kyle dumb for this when no one has seen it come to life? I can't wait for a new look offense.

Brodie is in for a rude awakening if he doesn't think this offense will look totally different. I don't necessarily mean better (hopefully) or worse but different in style, play calls, timing, volume swings, off schedule, etc.

Originally posted by billbird2111:
True. You're absolutely, 101-percent correct. My statement was in response to another post that maintained Jimmy G. would get traded away even IF he won the Super Bowl.

That is the most preposterous statement I've ever read. No Super Bowl winning QB gets traded away OR replaced by another QB.

But, you're right, in order for that to happen, the 49ers have to make the playoffs first.