Dallas Cowboys QB Trey Lance Thread

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
How is ready when he's more high school football than college? And not to mention it was Division II college meaning his opponents were JUCO level, and that was only for one yr. "Well he looked pretty good against the Texans" lol, that's not saying much. You have a win now squad, and a future possible pro bowl QB, but years down the line. I don't think this has been thought through.

It is d1 He looked better against the Texans then all quarterbacks but 2. He looked better better then any rookie quarterback this season with two games, except Lawrence. Yes we are in win now, we just need a qb who can get us over the hump. Do you not think he's ready to throw 18 touchdowns and 12 interceptions? Because those are the same numbers we're going to get next season with Jimmy. Might be a little bit different but the touchdown ratio to interceptions is going to be the same

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
It seems to be a league consensus that Trey isn't ready yet. Keep something in mind folks, Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench 3 yrs. Trey has all the mental and physical tools, give the kid some time to learn.

Packers didn't trade 3 1st RD picks to get him. Has a team ever traded multiple 1st RD picks to draft a player and sit him for 2 years?

Secondly the Packers had an elite QB at the time.

So because he was picked 3rd, you're gonna rush the guy out there and let him get destroyed? 🙄 His mechanics has to be worked on. His accuracy has to be worked. His soft touch passes needs to be worked on. He holds on to the ball too long, his release is too slow. He needs time to work these things through. He's not a bust, but those of you trying to rush him out there when he clearly hasn't played enough football are about to make him a bust.

If he busts it'll be because he's not a good quarterback, not because he didn't sit long enough. He's ready…to start on the job training.

How is ready when he's more high school football than college? And not to mention it was Division II college meaning his opponents were JUCO level, and that was only for one yr. "Well he looked pretty good against the Texans" lol, that's not saying much. You have a win now squad, and a future possible pro bowl QB, but years down the line. I don't think this has been thought through.

I guess "ready" can have different meanings. I think your definition is, "ready to lead a SB team". My meaning is, "ready to learn". My hope is he learns quickly enough to take advantage of prime Kittle, Warner, Deebo, etc.

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
It seems to be a league consensus that Trey isn't ready yet. Keep something in mind folks, Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench 3 yrs. Trey has all the mental and physical tools, give the kid some time to learn.

Packers didn't trade 3 1st RD picks to get him. Has a team ever traded multiple 1st RD picks to draft a player and sit him for 2 years?

Secondly the Packers had an elite QB at the time.

those of you trying to rush him out there when he clearly hasn't played enough football are about to make him a bust.

So hes going to play more football by not playing football?
Look, you put him on the field, give him a year and if its obvious he is going to suck, you cut your losses sooner than later and move on.

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
It seems to be a league consensus that Trey isn't ready yet. Keep something in mind folks, Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench 3 yrs. Trey has all the mental and physical tools, give the kid some time to learn.

Packers didn't trade 3 1st RD picks to get him. Has a team ever traded multiple 1st RD picks to draft a player and sit him for 2 years?

Secondly the Packers had an elite QB at the time.

So because he was picked 3rd, you're gonna rush the guy out there and let him get destroyed? 🙄 His mechanics has to be worked on. His accuracy has to be worked. His soft touch passes needs to be worked on. He holds on to the ball too long, his release is too slow. He needs time to work these things through. He's not a bust, but those of you trying to rush him out there when he clearly hasn't played enough football are about to make him a bust.

If he busts it'll be because he's not a good quarterback, not because he didn't sit long enough. He's ready…to start on the job training.

How is ready when he's more high school football than college? And not to mention it was Division II college meaning his opponents were JUCO level, and that was only for one yr. "Well he looked pretty good against the Texans" lol, that's not saying much. You have a win now squad, and a future possible pro bowl QB, but years down the line. I don't think this has been thought through.

Your "win now" squad with Jimmy failed. So you want to stick with that. Got it.
D2 again, what a maroon.

Originally posted by 9moon:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
It seems to be a league consensus that Trey isn't ready yet. Keep something in mind folks, Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench 3 yrs. Trey has all the mental and physical tools, give the kid some time to learn.

Packers didn't trade 3 1st RD picks to get him. Has a team ever traded multiple 1st RD picks to draft a player and sit him for 2 years?

Secondly the Packers had an elite QB at the time.

So because he was picked 3rd, you're gonna rush the guy out there and let him get destroyed? 🙄 His mechanics has to be worked on. His accuracy has to be worked. His soft touch passes needs to be worked on. He holds on to the ball too long, his release is too slow. He needs time to work these things through. He's not a bust, but those of you trying to rush him out there when he clearly hasn't played enough football are about to make him a bust.

If he busts it'll be because he's not a good quarterback, not because he didn't sit long enough. He's ready…to start on the job training.

Exactly what was the meaning of Lance not being ready until year 3?

Does that mean, he should not start or play until year 3... or... Should we expect the team to start winning with Lance in his 3rd year??

If he's not ready, than find someone who is. Two posters were saying he was already better than the other loser yesterday because Trey scored less points against the same defense (stupid) but that other loser doesn't need training wheels. It's a team game, if Trey can't cut it, them sit him until he can.

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by 9moon:

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
It seems to be a league consensus that Trey isn't ready yet. Keep something in mind folks, Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench 3 yrs. Trey has all the mental and physical tools, give the kid some time to learn.

Packers didn't trade 3 1st RD picks to get him. Has a team ever traded multiple 1st RD picks to draft a player and sit him for 2 years?

Secondly the Packers had an elite QB at the time.

So because he was picked 3rd, you're gonna rush the guy out there and let him get destroyed? 🙄 His mechanics has to be worked on. His accuracy has to be worked. His soft touch passes needs to be worked on. He holds on to the ball too long, his release is too slow. He needs time to work these things through. He's not a bust, but those of you trying to rush him out there when he clearly hasn't played enough football are about to make him a bust.

If he busts it'll be because he's not a good quarterback, not because he didn't sit long enough. He's ready…to start on the job training.

Exactly what was the meaning of Lance not being ready until year 3?

Does that mean, he should not start or play until year 3... or... Should we expect the team to start winning with Lance in his 3rd year??

If he's not ready, than find someone who is. Two posters were saying he was already better than the other loser yesterday because Trey scored less points against the same defense (stupid) but that other loser doesn't need training wheels. It's a team game, if Trey can't cut it, them sit him until he can.

Trey is ready. All of this talk is complete tomfoolery.

Originally posted by fan49:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
How is ready when he's more high school football than college? And not to mention it was Division II college meaning his opponents were JUCO level, and that was only for one yr. "Well he looked pretty good against the Texans" lol, that's not saying much. You have a win now squad, and a future possible pro bowl QB, but years down the line. I don't think this has been thought through.

It is d1 He looked better against the Texans then all quarterbacks but 2. He looked better better then any rookie quarterback this season with two games, except Lawrence. Yes we are in win now, we just need a qb who can get us over the hump. Do you not think he's ready to throw 18 touchdowns and 12 interceptions? Because those are the same numbers we're going to get next season with Jimmy. Might be a little bit different but the touchdown ratio to interceptions is going to be the same

Not with Raheem Morris, Pete Carroll, and Belichick, no I don't. Kyle will have to scheme the fool out of this offense to protect him

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
Not with Raheem Morris, Pete Carroll, and Belichick, no I don't. Kyle will have to scheme the fool out of this offense to protect him

Are you talking about Trey or Jimmy? Asking for a friend.

Originally posted by NDSU:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by NDSU:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
NVM this was addressed ad nauseam.

You cant do that. Now I am really wondering.

Just pointed out that the Bison are not DIV II.

My money was on something to do with Kap. :(

Sorry to disappoint. But I saw like six posters eviscerate him for the Div II comment after I posted and decided it was overkill.

Originally posted by JTB1974:
If we are being honest, nobody expected Mahomes to be this good. He was the 8th overall pick which is good but it's not like he was the #1overall pick. I always wondered how Mahomes would have turned out if he went to an organization like the jags or jets.

Not true. I expected MVP by year 3. Granted, I was late by a year. Too bad the former "Official 49ers forum" got defunded by the team and became the "49ers Faithful Forum." All my bragging rights evidence is gone. :(

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:

Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:

Originally posted by JoseCortez:

Originally posted by Ezekiel38:

Originally posted by JoseCortez:

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Lol. Lance guys also point to Stafford as the guy who took the rams over the top and that a franchise qb is necessary to win the superbowl. Stop with the conflicting arguments.

You do however need a QB that can elevate his game to beat playoff level defensive scheming. Playoff defenses will expose lesser QBs more times than not. You can be good but come playoffs you need to be elite and timely for three or four games

Heres the problem I have with any argument that wins are not a qb stat.

You take Aaron Rodgers, put him on the Giants, they're winning at least 11 games, probably more. You cant say that with any other position. That's why wins are a qb stat.

For Rodgers yes cuz he is elite.

Jimmy is not and the defense and run game carried his ass much of his time here.

Put Jimmy on the Giants and they win 6 games or less.

You take Aaron Donald and put him on the jaguars and they're still 2 and 15. A qb wins and loses games. No other position does that. That's why wins should be tied to the qb.

Then so should losses, and therefore Jimmy is a choke artist, Super Bowl LOSER and always will be. Because he's never getting back there again. No one will ever match his 2.8 4th quarter passer rating when it mattered most. If this is true, all the Jimmy love should have ended in 2019. But it didn't, because you don't really believe what you're saying. You're only saying it because it's the one and only statistical measure where Jimmy stands tall (you know that YPA doesn't matter when the WR is leading the NFL in YAC every season, so you have to hang your head on this one).

Of course, that win% has steadily dropped. He started out an incredible 21-5 (.807) for the first half of his career starts. Then, the next half, he dropped to 15-11 (.577). More than twice as many losses. You think that win percentage is going to climb back up again when he's on an inferior team?

Super Bowl loser? I guess Nick Bosa is too. And Shanny. And Tom Brady he's a multiple time Super Bowl LOSER. Mahomes throw him in there. You saying JG will never get back there again? How would you know? Plus would that prove anything? Marino never got back their either he was and is arguably the goat.

We've already seen JG on a team going nowhere fast I believe that team was 1-10 JG went undefeated. Everyone agrees JG is a solid oft injured QB who won a lot of games for our club when healthy. No need to label anyone a "choke artist". I mean no one applies that to Bosa or Kittle who were out there in the same SB defeat. I think you are inadvertently making the point you are arguing against. The whole point is QBs take an oversized share of the winning and losing. Just the nature of the position. And yes they are more important than other positions. It's the most important position in sports imo.

Great points!

Missing the point isn't making a great point. It's missing the point.

I think he made a great point. I think Jimmy handled the QB controversy between him and Trey masterfully, and not let it affect team chemistry. I think he gutted it out though some pretty painful injuries and didn't tank versus guys like Midget Murrey gets a litttle heat, the guy melts into a puddle of goo. He lead the team to the NFC championship game despite all the media harping the issues surrounding the three picks given up for Trey. He kept playing football when he could have easily been resentful and spilt the locker room. Jimmy may not have Treys rocket arm but he did play a big part in the 49ers getting into the NFC championship. To say he didn't is to be a Jimmy hater, in my opinion.

Okay so did you read the post he responded to? The point is that it is inaccurate to give a QB all the credit for a win OR all the blame for a loss in almost every case.

I read the post. It basically said wins and losses are directly related to how good your QB is.

No. The implication they made is that they are so uniquely tied to your QB that it's a unique QB stat. That's false. QBs are maybe 40% of wins and losses most of the time at best, sometimes more, sometimes less. And THAT is the rub! — The amount that the QB contributes to a win or loss generally fluctuates tremendously! That's why it's not a useful QB stat in and of itself without context. You can use it when you can isolate variables, and you won't drift too far into logical error. For example, when you are comparing two QBs on the same team. In that case, it's an accurate measure of the RELATIVE difference between the two QBs. RELATIVE is the operative word here. Why? Because all that tells you when the team loses with one QB and wins with another is that the latter QB is better than the former. It tells you nothing about the latter QB in relation to the rest of the QBs in the league! And that's the mistake you people are making. You're taking a measurement that is only valid within certain parameters, and you're blowing it right out of the gates and generalizing it. This is a logical error.

If you can't hold most of these variables constant or control them, you cannot use wins and losses to tell how good a QB is in relation to QBs not placed in the same situation, because a QB is not SOLELY or even more than 50% responsible for wins or losses most of the time (no QB can throw without a WR catching it; no QB can throw without the minimum physical time required for a WR to run a route and a QB to throw the ball; etc).

In conclusion: the only thing at this point that can be concluded with certainty from Jimmy's win/loss record is that he's a good deal better than C.J. Beathard, Nick Mullens, and Brian Hoyer. It tells you nothing about whether or not he is, to pound the same tired example, any better at all than Stafford. Because they were in entirely different circumstances.

Hence why it's simply a bad idea to use as a QB stat.

.
.

And as for the "intended air yards per attempt" debates, it's the same reason, except IAYPA falls on the other side of the issue. IAYPA is a statistic that CLEARLY is mostly about the quarterback. No WR is magically pulling along a pass as it travels through the air. This isn't Madden. That ball travels ONLY because the QB threw it. While there are some factors that affect if the QB can throw it, there are far FAR fewer factors going into to this stat outside of the QB than there is with wins and losses.

I disagree.

Some people disagree that the world is approximately an oblate spheroid.

Originally posted by NDSU:
Your "win now" squad with Jimmy failed. So you want to stick with that. Got it.
D2 again, what a maroon.

Getting to the NFC championship game with one healthy non throwing arm is a highly successful season. Anyone who says different is a clown. The plan is working. Now time to trade Jimmy and get Trey going. Trey is ready to start his nfl career. There will be bumps, bruises, good, and bad but in the end he will successful. He's got every tool physically and mentally that is needed and an absolute phenomenal situation to grow in. Go 9ers!

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
He's not ready as of right now. Everyone knows it. Even Joe Montana.

How does Joe know if he's ready or not? He hasn't been to a Niners practice or seen him throw. Going by others opinions is not going to cut it.

How does Joe Montana know what a great QB looks like?

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:
I was just pointing out how terrible your argument is. You said he played to the equivalent of Jimmy yet only scored 10 points. Our worst scoring in YEARS... So to counter using your own logic he's basically "the equivalent" of Beathard.

Jimmy scored a whopping 7 more pts vs a AZ team that didn't have Watt/Nuk/Murray and others.

years lol? A Jimmy lead offense put up 6 pts vs GB in the playoffs this yr. Jimmy put up 9 pts vs DC

We get it, Jimmy is white.

Reported. Wanted you to know it wasn't NYniner85 so you don't bully him. It was me.

Originally posted by ninerjok:
Hey guys Lance would be the #1 pick in this draft. Wow I'm just dumbfounded at the amazing analysis by these NFL media hacks. Well let me backtrack a little, Daniel Jeremiah actually said he would be #1 overall with an additional year in college. Would certainly be first QB selected but that is pretty high praise. DJ is one of the better draft analysts going.

QBs are overvalued in every draft, and in this upcoming draft, the QBs aren't very impressive. Trey Lance, Justin Fields, and Zach Wilson all would go number one in this draft, guaranteed.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by RackofRibs49:

Originally posted by Giedi:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by NYniner85:

Originally posted by JoseCortez:
I'm hoping to see it more. We didn't see it at all with Jimmy. I don't know if it was Shanahan refusing to take a shot. The oline. Jimmy's inaccurate deep ball. A reciever who couldnt stretch the field? A combination of all of that? It was a staple of the bill walsh offense that has completely disappeared.

Just not Jimmy's game. Like I've said a lot in here….his quick release is awesome and great on those short routes. It's all about his torque/upper body not really his footwork….when you see him take those shots downfield (not always) but his footwork is real bad. He's still trying to throw with that torque/up half stuff, like his quick throws…his arm talent isn't elite enough to do that downfield, so he needs those proper mechanics to get the ball downfield accurately.

Your right about his torque - he's all upper body.

I think Trey has the elite arm to do it either way - the Jimmy Torque way or the correctly mechanical way.

Either way, I'm excited about 2022.

P.S. to NY85, Yeah, the two 2021 Seadderall season Games were lost *both* by 7 points. The first one 28-21, the next one 30-23. The first seadderall game when Trey played one half, 49ers lost by 7. The second game when Jimmy played 100% they lost by 7. That is another Data Point that points to Trey's rediness and ability. The fact that Trey played one half when he was a stone cold rookie coming into his first *real* regular season game ever in his rookie career and played to the equivalent of Jimmy - if you consider the same margin of loss in both games.

Lol now do QB's in 49ers history the last 10 years who only scored 10 points like Trey. Jimmy did it once his entire career and won, Trey in 2.5 games has done it too.

Sure now do how many of them are 21 year old rookies who had 1 start in like 2 years before that particular game.

I was just pointing out how terrible your argument is. You said he played to the equivalent of Jimmy yet only scored 10 points. Our worst scoring in YEARS... So to counter using your own logic he's basically "the equivalent" of Beathard.

1. Not my argument

2. Comparing a rookie with very little experience and youth to a seasoned 8 year vet should be graded on a curve if you're doing it anyways.

The offense was very different in both games, partially cuz of the change in QB but also due to players available. Lance had no Kittle who impacts the game in many ways. Lance also had Mitchell who was playing hurt and on an obvious pitch count. The game was also on the road vs an Arizona team that had a healthy JJ Watt. We moved the ball very well for the most part. Failures on 3rd and then 4th down led to the low score. Blindly looking at the score doesn't quite cut it when making an evaluation of how each guy played.

Then again based on your posts I'm not expecting a proper evaluation from you. Just trolling.

So much this. It especially tickles me to those Jimmy stans who say those who criticized him will immediately do so against Trey. It's so wrong I chuckle. We're going to be grading Trey on a curve for the next season, because he's inexperienced and young and full of potential. As for him being a success without a curve, for most of us all he has to do is match the statistical output from Jimmy.

Originally posted by fan49:

Originally posted by BamaNiner:
That's an opinion many have. However, I believe he would've fallen off hard with more exposure.
I think he is one of the most fortunate athletes in the last few years he didn't have a season to play in 20.
This guy was the 3rd overall pick after starting two years his whole life at qb in his life.

I think Jimmy has been one of the most fortunate athletes in the last few years. Benefits of a great defense of the gate running game and a great offensive play caller. The Niners are actually taking a hit right now because of how bad he is they're not getting great offers. I don't know how many people on this board actually think he's a good quarterback but if he was that good we would've already heard about offers being made

Matthew Stafford was traded on January 30th of last year (pending the start of the league year, but terms were agreed to and announced). Stafford, who these Jimmy stans think is the same. And the QB market wasn't as active as this year. That just shows you how badly these people here are overestimating Jimmy.

I do really hope someone overpays for Jimmy. No starting QB should get back anything less than a second round pick, and really, it should be at least close to a first round pick.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:

Originally posted by JTB1974:

Originally posted by goldlame2013:
It seems to be a league consensus that Trey isn't ready yet. Keep something in mind folks, Aaron Rodgers sat on the bench 3 yrs. Trey has all the mental and physical tools, give the kid some time to learn.

Packers didn't trade 3 1st RD picks to get him. Has a team ever traded multiple 1st RD picks to draft a player and sit him for 2 years?

Secondly the Packers had an elite QB at the time.

So because he was picked 3rd, you're gonna rush the guy out there and let him get destroyed? ???? His mechanics has to be worked on. His accuracy has to be worked. His soft touch passes needs to be worked on. He holds on to the ball too long, his release is too slow. He needs time to work these things through. He's not a bust, but those of you trying to rush him out there when he clearly hasn't played enough football are about to make him a bust.

If he busts it'll be because he's not a good quarterback, not because he didn't sit long enough. He's ready…to start on the job training.

This. He's either going to be great or he won't. And if he's terrible, there's nothing anyone could have done to prevent it. You either have greatness or you do not .

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by mayo49:

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
He's not ready as of right now. Everyone knows it. Even Joe Montana.

How does Joe know if he's ready or not? He hasn't been to a Niners practice or seen him throw. Going by others opinions is not going to cut it.

How does Joe Montana know what a great QB looks like?

How does Joe Montana know what Trey Lance looks like when he's not seen any of his practices?